tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-44863763514391413482015-03-05T20:38:13.290-06:00the corner tavernMusic. Sports. Law.Davehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08981424431669076836noreply@blogger.comBlogger567125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486376351439141348.post-45660777765860396472013-07-16T20:25:00.003-05:002013-07-16T20:25:54.090-05:00My “New” Blogging Home<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-g77BTQLsURo/UeXx2KBTlxI/AAAAAAAACGw/XkxuSXZx9lg/s1600/vonEbers_Evergreen.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="240" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-g77BTQLsURo/UeXx2KBTlxI/AAAAAAAACGw/XkxuSXZx9lg/s640/vonEbers_Evergreen.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:DocumentProperties>
<o:Template>Normal</o:Template>
<o:Revision>0</o:Revision>
<o:TotalTime>0</o:TotalTime>
<o:Pages>1</o:Pages>
<o:Words>112</o:Words>
<o:Characters>639</o:Characters>
<o:Company>Law Office of David P. von Ebers</o:Company>
<o:Lines>5</o:Lines>
<o:Paragraphs>1</o:Paragraphs>
<o:CharactersWithSpaces>784</o:CharactersWithSpaces>
<o:Version>11.1539</o:Version>
</o:DocumentProperties>
<o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
<o:AllowPNG/>
</o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:DoNotShowRevisions/>
<w:DoNotPrintRevisions/>
<w:DisplayHorizontalDrawingGridEvery>0</w:DisplayHorizontalDrawingGridEvery>
<w:DisplayVerticalDrawingGridEvery>0</w:DisplayVerticalDrawingGridEvery>
<w:UseMarginsForDrawingGridOrigin/>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]-->
<!--StartFragment-->
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">Since April or so, I’ve been
cross-posting just about everything I write here and at <i><a href="http://thisweekinblackness.com/">This Week in Blackness</a></i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">. In the interest of consistency, and because I
really appreciate the opportunity I’ve been given over there, I’m going to
transition to posting my work primarily over there for the duration. My posts
at <i>TWiB</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"> are (and will be)
collected <a href="http://thisweekinblackness.com/author/david-von-ebers/">here</a>,
but I encourage you to check out the podcasts and other bloggers who post
there. It’s a great community and an important independent media outlet. I
expect great things to come from my association there.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">Thanks for all your support over the
past couple of years. I look forward to “seeing” you at <i>TWiB</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<!--EndFragment-->Davehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08981424431669076836noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486376351439141348.post-37588805086008052242013-07-15T21:28:00.002-05:002013-07-15T21:28:37.708-05:00The Death of Trayvon Martin and Learning How to Listen<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/yw4UQFtndeM" width="420"></iframe>
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:DocumentProperties>
<o:Template>Normal</o:Template>
<o:Revision>0</o:Revision>
<o:TotalTime>0</o:TotalTime>
<o:Pages>1</o:Pages>
<o:Words>428</o:Words>
<o:Characters>2444</o:Characters>
<o:Company>Law Office of David P. von Ebers</o:Company>
<o:Lines>20</o:Lines>
<o:Paragraphs>4</o:Paragraphs>
<o:CharactersWithSpaces>3001</o:CharactersWithSpaces>
<o:Version>11.1539</o:Version>
</o:DocumentProperties>
<o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
<o:AllowPNG/>
</o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:DoNotShowRevisions/>
<w:DoNotPrintRevisions/>
<w:DisplayHorizontalDrawingGridEvery>0</w:DisplayHorizontalDrawingGridEvery>
<w:DisplayVerticalDrawingGridEvery>0</w:DisplayVerticalDrawingGridEvery>
<w:UseMarginsForDrawingGridOrigin/>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]-->
<!--StartFragment-->
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">Garland Jeffreys, <a href="http://wildinthestreets.info/lyrics/56-racial-repertoire-by-garland-jeffreys.html">“Racial
Repertoire,”</a> from <i><a href="http://wildinthestreets.info/discography/50-dont-call-me-buckwheat-1992.html">Don’t
Call Me Buckwheat</a></i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"> (1992) <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">I’m still trying to collect my thoughts
on the George Zimmerman verdict, so I haven’t posted anything substantive for
the past couple days. I spent some time listening to <a href="http://thisweekinblackness.com/projects/podcasts/twibradio/">TWiB.FM</a>
yesterday and today. They’ve dedicated several hours to addressing the case and
various reactions to it. Mostly what I’ve come away with is this: If you’re a
middle-aged white guy like me, right now is probably a good time to <i>listen</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"> to people of color, rather than to lecture … well … <i>anybody</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"> about the trial itself or the underlying incident.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>Listen</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">That’s a skill that’s hard to learn,
especially, I think, for white guys who are used to thinking of themselves as
The World’s Foremost Experts On Everything. It’s especially hard for me, I
think, because as the youngest child in a very large family, I spent my
childhood feeling as though I couldn’t ever get a word in edgewise – so when I
reached adulthood, I more or less started talking and never stopped.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">But we – all of us, collectively:
black, white, brown – have until the end of time to parse and analyze and
rehash every detail, every subtle nuance of the case. Right now, what’s more
important than all that rational, careful, scientific analysis, is to <i>listen</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">. There’s a huge segment of our population who are
hurting right now. People of color feel strongly that the criminal justice
system is stacked against them; that the outcome of the Zimmerman case,
although expected, confirms a long-held belief that their lives are worth less
than ours. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">People are hurt and angry. People feel
as though they are targets because of their race. People feel as though their
children aren’t safe on account of their race. So, yeah, I think those of us
who aren’t in that position should stop and listen. I don’t think that’s too
much to ask.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">If you’re looking for a place to start,
I recommend my friends at <i><a href="http://thisweekinblackness.com/">This
Week In Blackness</a></i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">. In addition
to the podcasts, there are several posts on the Zimmerman trial and related
matters. Another good starting point is <a href="http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2013/07/trayvon-martin-and-the-irony-of-american-justice/277782/">this
piece by Ta-Nehisi Coates at <i>The Atlantic</i></a>. And if you’re not
following Wieland (<a href="file:///lawscribe">@lawscribe</a>) on
Twitter, you’re doing yourself a great disservice.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">The point isn’t that you have listen to
or read what these folks have to say and simply agree with them. The point is,
everybody keeps saying they want a “dialogue.” Well, sometimes the only way to
have a dialogue is to let the other person speak first.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<!--EndFragment-->Davehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08981424431669076836noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486376351439141348.post-32013416549644249082013-07-14T12:18:00.000-05:002013-07-14T21:13:42.997-05:00“You Can Get Killed Just For Living In Your American Skin …”<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="236" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/nghqjBwZTiE" width="420"></iframe><br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i><a href="http://brucespringsteen.net/songs/american-skin-41-shots">41 shots</a> <o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>41
shots<o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>41
shots<o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>41
shots<o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>41
shots <o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>41
shots<o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>41
shots <o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>41
shots ... and we</i><i>’</i><i>ll take that ride <o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>’cross
this bloody river<o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>to
the other side<o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>41
shots ... cut through the night <o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>You’re
kneeling over his body in the vestibule <o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>Praying for his life <o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>Is
it a gun, is it a knife<o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>Is
it a wallet, this is your life <o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>It
ain’t no secret <o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>It
ain’t no secret </i></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>No secret my friend <o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>You
can get killed just for living<o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>In your American skin <o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>41
shots <o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>Lena
gets her son ready for school <o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>She
says “on these streets, Charles <o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>You’ve
got to understand the rules <o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>If
an officer stops you<o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>Promise
you'll always be polite, <o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>that
you’ll never ever run away <o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>Promise Mama you’ll keep
your hands in sight” <o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>Is
it a gun, is it a knife<o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>Is
it a wallet, this is your life <o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>It
ain’t no secret<o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>It
ain’t no secret <o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>No
secret my friend <o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>You
can get killed just for living <o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>In your American skin <o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>Is
it a gun, is it a knife <o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>Is
it in your heart, is it in your eyes <o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>It ain’t no secret <o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>41
shots ... and we’ll take that ride <o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>’Cross
this bloody river <o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>To
the other side <o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>41
shots ... got my boots caked in this mud <o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>We’re baptized in these
waters and in each other’s blood <o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>Is
it a gun, is it a knife<o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>Is
it a wallet, this is your life <o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>It
ain’t no secret <o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>It
ain’t no secret <o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>No
secret my friend <o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>You
can get killed just for living <o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>In
your American skin<o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<!--EndFragment-->Davehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08981424431669076836noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486376351439141348.post-40988420898133216482013-07-13T21:32:00.002-05:002013-07-13T21:32:35.605-05:00A Lot Of People Won’t Get No Justice Tonight …<iframe width="420" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/ga4wASz39Fc" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>Davehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08981424431669076836noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486376351439141348.post-15452759748167676072013-07-12T21:13:00.001-05:002013-07-12T21:13:47.366-05:00Your Friday Clash Song: Summon Up The Mas!<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/4N4LU7xFw08" width="420"></iframe>
<br />
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:DocumentProperties>
<o:Template>Normal</o:Template>
<o:Revision>0</o:Revision>
<o:TotalTime>0</o:TotalTime>
<o:Pages>1</o:Pages>
<o:Words>154</o:Words>
<o:Characters>883</o:Characters>
<o:Company>Law Office of David P. von Ebers</o:Company>
<o:Lines>7</o:Lines>
<o:Paragraphs>1</o:Paragraphs>
<o:CharactersWithSpaces>1084</o:CharactersWithSpaces>
<o:Version>11.1539</o:Version>
</o:DocumentProperties>
<o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
<o:AllowPNG/>
</o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:DoNotShowRevisions/>
<w:DoNotPrintRevisions/>
<w:DisplayHorizontalDrawingGridEvery>0</w:DisplayHorizontalDrawingGridEvery>
<w:DisplayVerticalDrawingGridEvery>0</w:DisplayVerticalDrawingGridEvery>
<w:UseMarginsForDrawingGridOrigin/>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]-->
<!--StartFragment-->
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><a href="http://www.joestrummer.org/the-clash/sandinista/lets-so-crazy.php">“Let’s
Go Crazy”</a> from <i><a href="http://clash.wikia.com/wiki/Sandinista!">Sandinista!</a></i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"> (1980).<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">No, it’s not <i>that</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"> “Let’s Go Crazy”; it’s a calypso-inspired jam from
what might be the most eclectic album ever released. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">The voice-over at the beginning and the
end of the song refers to the riots that erupted at the end of <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/august/30/newsid_2511000/2511059.stm">the
1976 Notting Hill Carnival in London</a>. The notes to this brief <a href="http://youtu.be/w_9A7CZT9g0">YouTube documentary</a> explain:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>The
final hours of the 1976 Notting Hill Carnival in London, England, erupted in a
violent and overdue settling of accounts between a racially biased and
repressive British police force and young West Indian youth. The sound and fury
and chaos of that clash was captured on vinyl in December 1980 by the only band
that mattered.<o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">Well, the subject matter may be
depressing, but the song is fantastic. So …<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>Turn. It. Up.<o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<!--EndFragment-->Davehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08981424431669076836noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486376351439141348.post-29466326424384818682013-07-11T20:06:00.000-05:002013-07-11T20:06:15.032-05:00Why I Didn’t Watch The George Zimmerman Trial<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-yXkVZXjSgw0/Ud9WAU_o-vI/AAAAAAAACGg/t5HVjJ70FwY/s1600/George+Zimmerman+NYT+Photo.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="250" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-yXkVZXjSgw0/Ud9WAU_o-vI/AAAAAAAACGg/t5HVjJ70FwY/s320/George+Zimmerman+NYT+Photo.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:DocumentProperties>
<o:Template>Normal</o:Template>
<o:Revision>0</o:Revision>
<o:TotalTime>0</o:TotalTime>
<o:Pages>1</o:Pages>
<o:Words>700</o:Words>
<o:Characters>3995</o:Characters>
<o:Company>Law Office of David P. von Ebers</o:Company>
<o:Lines>33</o:Lines>
<o:Paragraphs>7</o:Paragraphs>
<o:CharactersWithSpaces>4906</o:CharactersWithSpaces>
<o:Version>11.1539</o:Version>
</o:DocumentProperties>
<o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
<o:AllowPNG/>
</o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:DoNotShowRevisions/>
<w:DoNotPrintRevisions/>
<w:DisplayHorizontalDrawingGridEvery>0</w:DisplayHorizontalDrawingGridEvery>
<w:DisplayVerticalDrawingGridEvery>0</w:DisplayVerticalDrawingGridEvery>
<w:UseMarginsForDrawingGridOrigin/>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]-->
<!--StartFragment-->
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">Thursday morning, as Judge Debra S.
Nelson <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/12/us/zimmerman-jury-will-be-allowed-to-consider-lesser-manslaughter-charge.html?hp&amp;_r=0">decided
whether the jury in the George Zimmerman murder trial would be allowed to consider
“lesser included offenses”</a> like manslaughter, my 17 year old son lay
stretched out on the living room couch, one eye on a television show and one
eye on the screen of his mobile phone, scanning text messages from his friends.
A short time later, he showered and headed off to his part time summer job in
the information services department at the local high school. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">My biggest concern was whether he left
his dirty clothes in a pile on the bathroom floor. He did not.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">Later in the day, he meandered home
from work. As he often does, he caught up with one of his friends on the way
home, and so his path from there to here was circuitous. He stopped at a
convenience store to get a snack along the way.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">My biggest concern was whether he would
make in home in time for dinner. He did.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">He’s a good kid. His grades aren’t
great, but he’s smart and funny and has an enormous heart. He’ll get ahead in
life because he likes people, he knows how to communicate, and he has a good
attitude. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">He’s going to be a high school senior
in the fall. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">After that, of course, my biggest concern will be
how to pay for college.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<a name='more'></a><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">What I’m not likely to be concerned about at any
point along the way is this: My son, walking home on the streets where he
belongs, being confronted by some random 29 year old with a Barney Fife complex
– only with a round in the chamber instead of in his breast pocket – and an
ensuing struggle, a shot being fired, and my son bleeding out on the pavement.
I’m not saying that it couldn’t happen. I’m saying the risk of that happening
to my son is pretty slight. Even though we live just a short distance from
Chicago’s west side.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">Why?<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">As the white father of a white teenager, it’s hard
to avoid this simple fact: The odds of my son being confronted – and <i>shot
fucking dead</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"> – in those
circumstances are far less than the odds of a black teenager being confronted
and shot dead, in just about any circumstances.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">I haven’t been able to watch the George Zimmerman
trial play out on television for a host of reasons. Partly it’s because I have
a son who’s 17, the same age Trayvon Martin was the day he was shot and killed,
and another son who’s going to be 15 this weekend. Partly it’s because I had to
watch my mother and father bury my brother John in 1991, and my mother, then a
widow, bury my brother Tom in 2009. So, I have an inkling of what it must’ve
been like for Trayvon Martin’s parents to bury him. Except that my brothers at
least had the chance to live to adulthood. John was just shy of 36 when he
died; Tom was 51 – still way too young to die, but not fucking <i>seventeen</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">But mostly I haven’t been able to watch the
Zimmerman trial because of the underlying premise of the defense: Not that it
was some horrible, but justifiable, mistake; but that Martin somehow <i>deserved</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"> to die that evening in February 2012. That even
though Zimmerman accosted Martin – a <i>seventeen year old kid, fer Chrissakes</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"> – in a place where Martin had every right to be,
Martin is to blame because he fought back. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">Trayvon Martin was not in the wrong place at the wrong
time. He was heading home to his father’s house. He had every right to be in
that place at that time, and <i>nobody</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">
– certainly not an adult who was a stranger to him – had the right to stop him,
demand answers from him, follow him, badger him, or engage him in any sort of
physical conflict whatsoever. So I don’t give a good goddamn who punched whom.
I don’t care what he was wearing. I don’t give a damn if the 17 year old victim
happened to smoke a joint every once in awhile, or engaged in the kind of masculine
braggadocio that nearly every 17 year old boy engages in from time to time. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">I couldn’t watch the Zimmerman trial because none
of those things – what Martin may have said to Zimmerman, who threw the first
punch, how he was dressed, how he may have acted in other instances – <i>none
of those things should have cost a 17 year old boy his life</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">I can tell you this much. If some 29 year old
jackass followed one of my teenage boys down the street, accosted him, demanded
to know why my son was walking around <i>in his own neighborhood</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">, then got into some sort of physical altercation
with my son … I can tell you, to borrow a phrase from the BBC television show <i><a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1474684/">Luther</a></i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">, <b><i>it would come back on that jackass like the
hand of God</i></b></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">. I can tell you
that with absolute certainty.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">Then again, it’s all pretty academic when you know
that nothing like that is likely ever to happen to <i>your</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"> kid. But it’s not academic for Trayvon Martin’s
parents, is it.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<!--EndFragment-->Davehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08981424431669076836noreply@blogger.com17tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486376351439141348.post-42065058452807946582013-07-10T21:01:00.000-05:002013-07-10T21:01:24.424-05:00DOMA Update: The Fallout Begins<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-L2zHsH8iB1A/Ud4RRKg_HSI/AAAAAAAACF0/rozrMm6PqfQ/s1600/Supreme+Court+Rainbow+Flag.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="153" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-L2zHsH8iB1A/Ud4RRKg_HSI/AAAAAAAACF0/rozrMm6PqfQ/s400/Supreme+Court+Rainbow+Flag.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:DocumentProperties>
<o:Template>Normal</o:Template>
<o:Revision>0</o:Revision>
<o:TotalTime>0</o:TotalTime>
<o:Pages>1</o:Pages>
<o:Words>1080</o:Words>
<o:Characters>6156</o:Characters>
<o:Company>Law Office of David P. von Ebers</o:Company>
<o:Lines>51</o:Lines>
<o:Paragraphs>12</o:Paragraphs>
<o:CharactersWithSpaces>7560</o:CharactersWithSpaces>
<o:Version>11.1539</o:Version>
</o:DocumentProperties>
<o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
<o:AllowPNG/>
</o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:DoNotShowRevisions/>
<w:DoNotPrintRevisions/>
<w:DisplayHorizontalDrawingGridEvery>0</w:DisplayHorizontalDrawingGridEvery>
<w:DisplayVerticalDrawingGridEvery>0</w:DisplayVerticalDrawingGridEvery>
<w:UseMarginsForDrawingGridOrigin/>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]-->
<!--StartFragment-->
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">Well, it’s not exactly dogs and cats
living together, but the effects of the Supreme Court’s decision in<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span><i><a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pdf/12-307_6j37.pdf">United States
v. Windsor</a></i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">, No. 12-307 (U.S.
Sup. Ct., June 26, 2013) (.pdf), which struck down Section 3 of the federal
Defense of Marriage Act, are being felt out here on the prairie. Wednesday, the
ACLU of Illinois and Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund, Inc., <a href="http://www.aclu-il.org/lambda-legal-and-aclu-of-illinois-ask-court-for-swift-ruling-for-freedom-to-marry/">announced</a>
that they’ve filed a motion for summary judgment, based, in part, on the <i>Windsor</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"> case, in two consolidated lawsuits pending in the
Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois, challenging state laws that prevent
same sex couples from marrying.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">The cases, known as <i>Darby v. Orr</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"> and <i>Lazaro v. Orr</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">, were filed in 2012 by same-sex couples against
Cook County Clerk David Orr, the local public official who issues marriage
licenses, asserting that Illinois’ ban on same-sex marriage violates the
guarantees of due process, privacy, and equal protection of the laws found in <a href="http://www.ilga.gov/commission/lrb/con1.htm">Article I</a>, Sections 2,
6, and 18 of the Illinois Constitution, and the guarantee against “special
legislation” found in Article I, Section 13. <a href="http://www.nbcchicago.com/blogs/ward-room/County-Clerk-Refuses-To-Defend-Against-Gay-Marriage-Lawsuit-200882291.html">As
an aside</a>, David Orr, who’s kind of a badass, agrees with the plaintiffs and
has refused to defend the state laws under attack, as a consequence of which
two downstate county clerks were given permission to intervene. Illinois
Attorney General Lisa Madigan and Cook County State’s Attorney Anita Alvarez
have likewise filed pleadings in support of the plaintiffs. So, yeah, I kind of
love Cook County right now.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">But, I digress. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<a name='more'></a><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">At the risk of devolving into lawyerly
wonkiness, it’s probably wise to explain, at the outset, what the plaintiffs
are doing by filing a “motion for summary judgment.” Motions for summary
judgment are appropriate where none of the material facts of the case is in
dispute, and the moving party believes that, as a consequence, it is entitled
to judgment in its favor as a matter of law. In other words, if the parties
essentially agree on the underlying facts, there’s no need for a trial (the
primary purpose of which is to resolve factual disputes); rather, the judge,
who’s supposed to know the law, can simply apply the law to the facts to
determine the outcome of the case. Ordinarily, motions for summary judgment are
difficult to win, because to defeat such a motion, the opposing party need only
demonstrate that at least one material fact is in dispute (and so a trial is
necessary), <i>or</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"> that the moving
party’s interpretation of the law is incorrect.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">In the <i>Darby</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"> and <i>Lazaro</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"> cases, however, the Supreme Court’s decision in <i>Windsor</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"> made the plaintiffs’ case a little easier. If you
want to follow along at home, <a href="http://www.aclu-il.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/2013%2007%2010%20Memoandum%20in%20Support%20of%20Plaintiffs%27%20Motion%20for%20Summary%20Judgment.PDF">here’s
a link</a> where you can download a .pdf copy of the Memorandum of Law in
Support of Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment (that’s fancy Cook County
Legalese for “brief,” by the way), which details the plaintiffs’ legal
position. Basically, the plaintiffs utilize <i>Windsor</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"> in a few different ways. First, they cite <i>Windsor</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"> for the proposition that same sex couples have a
fundamental right to marry, noting that the Supreme Court said marriage allows
gay and lesbian couples to “<span style="color: black;">define themselves by
their commit</span></span><span style="color: black;">­</span><span style="color: black; font-family: Georgia;">ment to each other,” “and so live with
pride in themselves and their union and in a status of equality with all other
married persons.” <i><a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pdf/12-307_6j37.pdf">Windsor</a></i></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Georgia;">, slip op. at 14. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">Furthermore, <i>Windsor</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"> is central to the <i>Darby</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"> and <i>Lazaro</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"> plaintiffs’ equal protection arguments. While the plaintiffs’ claims
in <i>Darby</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"> and <i>Lazaro</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"> are grounded in the Illinois Constitution,
Illinois follows the same sort of equal protection analysis the federal courts
use in determining rights under the Fourteenth Amendment. Consequently, the
plaintiffs argue, although <i>Windsor</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">
is not controlling, that decision ought to be highly persuasive to the Circuit
Court of Cook County when it considers the plaintiffs’ equal protection
challenge to Illinois’ ban on same-sex marriage.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">So, while the <i>Darby</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"> and <i>Lazaro</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"> plaintiffs argue that their equal protection claims should be
analyzed under “strict scrutiny” applicable to cases involving suspect
classifications like race and gender, they cite <i>Windsor</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"> for the proposition that Illinois’ denial of equal
marriage rights fails even under the more forgiving “rational basis” test used
for non-suspect classifications. (See <a href="http://thisweekinblackness.com/2013/06/28/doma-rational-basis-test/">this
post</a> for an explanation of the “strict scrutiny” and “rational basis” tests
in equal protection cases.) In particular, they note that <i>Windsor</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">, in finding that DOMA did not serve a “legitimate
government interest,” rejected the same basic arguments advanced by the
defenders of Illinois’ discriminatory marriage scheme. To the contrary, the
Supreme Court held, the overtly discriminatory intent underlying DOMA meant
that the statute did not serve a legitimate government purpose:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>The
federal statute is invalid, for no legitimate purpose overcomes the purpose and
effect to disparage and to injure those whom the State, by its marriage laws,
sought to protect in personhood and dignity. By seeking to displace this
protection and treating those persons as living in marriages less respected
than others, the federal statute is in violation of the Fifth Amendment.</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i><a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pdf/12-307_6j37.pdf">Windsor</a></i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">, slip op. at 25-26.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">Finally, <i>Windsor</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"> plays a pivotal role in demonstrating why
Illinois’ denial of equal marriage rights harms gay and lesbian couples – that
is to say, why denying them the right to marry is, in fact, discriminatory –
because, by invalidating DOMA’s Section 3, the Supreme Court ruled that the
federal government must give legally married gay and lesbian couples the same
federal benefits it gives legally married straight couples. Illinois currently
allows gay and lesbian couples to enter into <a href="http://www.eqil.org/civil.html">civil unions</a>, but so far efforts to
repeal the same-sex marriage ban have stalled (even though the executive and
legislative branches are controlled by the Democrats and <a href="http://davescornertavern.blogspot.com/2013/02/a-huge-step-forward.html">the
Illinois Senate</a> has already passed marriage equality). After <i>Windsor</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">, the distinction between civil unions and equal
marriage rights takes on added significance, because if gay and lesbian couples
in Illinois are permitted to marry, they, too, will be entitled to those same
federal benefits. Not so with civil unions. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">So, while it doesn’t necessarily compel
the desired outcome, the Supreme Court’s decision in <i>Windsor</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"> may provide just enough additional support to
persuade the Circuit Court of Cook County to rule that Illinois’ ban on same
sex marriage is unconstitutional. If so, the opponents of marriage equality
will scream <i>We told you so!</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"> And
in this particular instance, they’ll be right.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<!--EndFragment-->Davehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08981424431669076836noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486376351439141348.post-32622219277382804412013-07-09T15:22:00.000-05:002013-07-09T15:22:56.567-05:00Rand Paul: Exactly Who We Thought He Was<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-QMc9CPyLU8g/UdxwV5pwD8I/AAAAAAAACFk/zbqv7rynprE/s1600/Rand+Paul.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="153" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-QMc9CPyLU8g/UdxwV5pwD8I/AAAAAAAACFk/zbqv7rynprE/s400/Rand+Paul.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:DocumentProperties>
<o:Template>Normal</o:Template>
<o:Revision>0</o:Revision>
<o:TotalTime>0</o:TotalTime>
<o:Pages>1</o:Pages>
<o:Words>1104</o:Words>
<o:Characters>6298</o:Characters>
<o:Company>Law Office of David P. von Ebers</o:Company>
<o:Lines>52</o:Lines>
<o:Paragraphs>12</o:Paragraphs>
<o:CharactersWithSpaces>7734</o:CharactersWithSpaces>
<o:Version>11.1539</o:Version>
</o:DocumentProperties>
<o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
<o:AllowPNG/>
</o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:DoNotShowRevisions/>
<w:DoNotPrintRevisions/>
<w:DisplayHorizontalDrawingGridEvery>0</w:DisplayHorizontalDrawingGridEvery>
<w:DisplayVerticalDrawingGridEvery>0</w:DisplayVerticalDrawingGridEvery>
<w:UseMarginsForDrawingGridOrigin/>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]-->
<!--StartFragment-->
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">Back in March, as civil libertarians
hailed Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) for his <a href="http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2013/03/201339114442314519.html">twelve-hour
attempted filibuster of John Brennan</a>, Pres. Obama’s nominee for CIA
director, I knew something wasn’t right. <a href="http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/03/did-rand-paul-ask-the-wrong-questions-in-his-drone-filibuster/274033/">Garrett
Epps at <i>The Atlantic</i></a> correctly identified the problem with Sen.
Paul’s rhetoric, but even he missed the point:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>[T]he
danger to our country is not the danger Paul <span style="color: blue;"><a href="http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-transcript-rand-paul-filibuster-20130307,0,876160.story"><span style="text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">identified in his filibuster</span></a></span>&nbsp;–
that “Americans could be killed in a cafe in San Francisco or in a restaurant
in Houston or at their home in Bowling Green, Kentucky.” The present danger is
that a new, low-cost, deniable technology will become a covert instrument of
foreign policy, used on targets abroad without adequate attention to
international law.<o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">Yes, the fundamental problem drones is
that we’re using them in this nonsensical “war on terror,” which, as it’s evolved
over the past twelve years, has run afoul of international law. But that’s not
really what Rand Paul was talking about, nor was his intended audience people
like Garrett Epps who are concerned about such things.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">Rand Paul wasn’t talking to peaceniks,
nor was he talking to civil libertarians. He was talking to neo-Confederates
who have an abiding fear of the black guy in the White House.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<a name='more'></a><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>No</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">, you’re saying, <i>that’s crazy! He’s a United States Senator, for
crying out loud. He wouldn’t be sending coded messages to secessionists!</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">Riiight. And <a href="http://freebeacon.com/rebel-yell/">this</a>, I’m sure, is just a
coincidence:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in; mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; text-align: justify; text-autospace: none;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>A close aide to
Sen. Rand Paul (R., Ky.) who co-wrote the senator’s 2011 book spent years
working as a pro-secessionist radio pundit and neo-Confederate activist,
raising questions about whether Paul will be able to transcend the same
fringe-figure associations that dogged his father’s political career.<o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in; mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; text-align: justify; text-autospace: none;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>Paul hired Jack
Hunter, 39, to help&nbsp;</i></span><span style="color: blue; font-family: ArialMT;"><i><a href="http://www.charlestoncitypaper.com/charleston/jack-hunter-goes-to-washington/Content?oid=3189069"><span style="font-family: Georgia; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">write</span></a></i></span><span style="color: #3e3d3d; font-family: Georgia;"><i>&nbsp;</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>his book&nbsp;The Tea Party Goes to Washington&nbsp;during
his 2010 Senate run. Hunter joined Paul’s office as his social media director
in August 2012.<o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in; mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; text-align: justify; text-autospace: none;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>From 1999 to
2012, Hunter was a South Carolina radio shock jock known as the “Southern
Avenger.” He has weighed in on issues such as </i></span><span style="color: blue; font-family: ArialMT;"><i><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20071104065513/http://www.southernavenger.com/82/?form_58.userid=4&amp;form_58.replyids=87"><span style="font-family: Georgia; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">racial
pride</span></a></i></span><span style="color: #3e3d3d; font-family: Georgia;"><i>&nbsp;</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>and&nbsp;</i></span><span style="color: blue; font-family: ArialMT;"><i><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20071104084926/http://www.southernavenger.com/82/?form_58.userid=4&amp;form_58.replyids=84"><span style="font-family: Georgia; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">Hispanic
immigration</span></a></i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>,&nbsp;and
stated his support for the&nbsp;</i></span><span style="color: blue; font-family: ArialMT;"><i><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20071104065842/http://www.southernavenger.com/82/?form_58.userid=4&amp;form_58.replyids=25"><span style="font-family: Georgia; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">assassination
of&nbsp;President Abraham Lincoln</span></a></i></span><span style="color: #3e3d3d; font-family: Georgia;"><i>.<o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in; mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; text-align: justify; text-autospace: none;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>During public
appearances, Hunter often wore a&nbsp;</i></span><span style="color: blue; font-family: ArialMT;"><i><a href="http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=2482&amp;dat=20050106&amp;id=JkZJAAAAIBAJ&amp;sjid=wQkNAAAAIBAJ&amp;pg=4095,1793531"><span style="font-family: Georgia; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">mask</span></a></i></span><span style="color: #3e3d3d; font-family: Georgia;"><i>&nbsp;</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>on which was printed a Confederate flag.<o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>Prior
to his radio career, while in his 20s, Hunter was a chairman in the&nbsp;</i></span><span style="color: blue; font-family: ArialMT;"><i><a href="http://dixienet.org/rights/2012/index.php"><span style="font-family: Georgia; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">League of the South</span></a></i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>, which “</i></span><span style="color: blue; font-family: ArialMT;"><i><a href="http://dixienet.org/rights/corebeliefs.shtml"><span style="font-family: Georgia; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">advocates</span></a></i></span><span style="color: #3e3d3d; font-family: Georgia;"><i> </i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>the secession and subsequent independence of the
Southern States from this forced union and the formation of a Southern
republic.”</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">That article, from <i><a href="http://freebeacon.com/">The Washington Free Beacon</a></i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">, quotes Hunter as <a href="http://freebeacon.com/rebel-yell/">saying</a> that when he was involved
in the League of the South in the late 1990s, it was not a racist organization.
That’s not what <a href="http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-files/groups/league-of-the-south">the
Southern Poverty Law Center says</a>:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>Founded
in 1994 … the overarching mission of the League of the South is to accomplish
what the Civil War did not — Southern secession. …<o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>From
the start, the league’s board was dominated by academics. Its unofficial
foundational text was Cracker Culture, a book by conservative history professor
Grady McWhiney, one of [League President Michael] Hill’s mentors, which asserts
that the South was populated by immigrants from Celtic areas of England and constitutes
a culture and population distinct from that of the North. At the beginning, it
only suggested that Southern secession might become necessary if the rest of
America did not straighten out.</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp;</span>But, SPLC points out: <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>[The
League] quickly became more radical. It came out against interracial marriage.
Hill publicly defended antebellum slavery as “God-ordained” and another league
leader described segregation as necessary to racial “integrity” of both races,
black and white alike. Hill called for a hierarchal society composed of
“superiors, equals and inferiors, each protected in their legal privileges” and
attacked egalitarianism as a “fatal heresy.” He said people other than white
Christians would be allowed to live in his South, but only if they bowed to “the
cultural dominance of the Anglo-Celtic people and their institutions.” Where
the goal of secession was once largely rhetorical, it became a seriously stated
aim.<o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">According to SPLC, Jack Kershaw, one of
the League’s founders and a board member through at least 2007, once said:
“Somebody needs to say a good word for slavery. Where in the world are the
Negroes&nbsp;better off today than in America?”<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">That was in 1998. <a href="http://freebeacon.com/rebel-yell/">According to the <i>Washington Free
Beacon</i></a>, Jack Hunter “was last</span><span style="color: blue; font-family: ArialMT;"><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/19991109220029/http://palmetto.org/chapter.htm"><span style="font-family: Georgia; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">&nbsp;listed
as chairman</span></a></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">&nbsp;of the
Charleston chapter of League of the South in 1999.” So much for the old <i>They-Weren’t-Racist-When-I-Was-a-Member</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"> trope.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">Rand Paul must have known all of this
when he first hired Jack Hunter to co-author his book in 2010. After all,
Hunter still appeared on his radio show – bedecked in a Confederate Battle
Flag-themed wrestler’s mask – under the <i>nom du guerre</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"> “Southern Avenger,” until 2012 … when Paul named
him director of social media.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">This is who Rand Paul is, folks. He’s
not a guy who cares about civil liberties. He’s a guy who’s steeped in
neo-Confederate tradition. He’s a guy who, during the 2010 senatorial campaign,
glibly questioned <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/rand-pauls-rewriting-of-his-own-remarks-on-the-civil-rights-act/2013/04/10/5b8d91c4-a235-11e2-82bc-511538ae90a4_blog.html">whether
the Civil Rights Act of 1964 should have barred private discrimination in
public accommodations</a>. He’s not all that concerned about <i>other</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"> civil liberties issues like <a href="http://politicalcorrection.org/blog/201201240010">racial profiling</a>
and <a href="http://www.policymic.com/articles/3640/after-tsa-patdown-rand-paul-and-ron-paul-should-condemn-nypd-s-stop-and-frisk">stop-and-frisk</a>.
In fact, <a href="http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2013/03/rand-paul-drones-filibuster-fundraising-campaign">he’s
really not all that concerned about the use of drones</a>, either. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">But he knows that there are white
Americans who fear a black President – especially a black President with the
military capability to put down another attempt at secession. If you don’t
think that’s who he was talking to back in March, you may need to have your
naïveté levels checked.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<!--EndFragment-->Davehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08981424431669076836noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486376351439141348.post-42238003647085202332013-07-08T20:34:00.000-05:002013-07-08T20:34:36.527-05:00Revisiting Roe, Privacy, And Involuntary Sterilization<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-IY1g6xln2Gs/Udtn5GV2qrI/AAAAAAAACFU/QFB6yHrTsBM/s1600/Abortion+protest.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="152" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-IY1g6xln2Gs/Udtn5GV2qrI/AAAAAAAACFU/QFB6yHrTsBM/s400/Abortion+protest.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:DocumentProperties>
<o:Template>Normal</o:Template>
<o:Revision>0</o:Revision>
<o:TotalTime>0</o:TotalTime>
<o:Pages>1</o:Pages>
<o:Words>1030</o:Words>
<o:Characters>5871</o:Characters>
<o:Company>Law Office of David P. von Ebers</o:Company>
<o:Lines>48</o:Lines>
<o:Paragraphs>11</o:Paragraphs>
<o:CharactersWithSpaces>7210</o:CharactersWithSpaces>
<o:Version>11.1539</o:Version>
</o:DocumentProperties>
<o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
<o:AllowPNG/>
</o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:DoNotShowRevisions/>
<w:DoNotPrintRevisions/>
<w:DisplayHorizontalDrawingGridEvery>0</w:DisplayHorizontalDrawingGridEvery>
<w:DisplayVerticalDrawingGridEvery>0</w:DisplayVerticalDrawingGridEvery>
<w:UseMarginsForDrawingGridOrigin/>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]-->
<!--StartFragment-->
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">This could be subtitled: “That Awkward
Moment When You Realize Involuntary Sterilization Still Happens In America.”<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">A few months ago, I wrote <a href="http://davescornertavern.blogspot.com/2013/01/the-other-side-of-roe.html">this
piece</a> about the Israeli government’s admission that it had given Ethiopian
women Depo-Provera injections without their knowledge or consent, thereby
rendering them temporarily sterile. Back then, I argued that in America,
state-sponsored involuntary sterilization would violate the Supreme Court’s
decision in <a href="http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=case&amp;court=us&amp;vol=410&amp;page=113"><span style="color: #001bf4; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;"><i>Roe v. Wade</i></span></a>,
410 U.S. 113 (1973), which held that the constitutional right to privacy
extended to decisions involving reproductive choice. As <i>Roe</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"> explained:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in; mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; text-align: justify; text-autospace: none;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>The Constitution
does not explicitly mention any right of privacy. In a line of decisions,
however, going back perhaps as far as </i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">Union
Pacific R. Co. v. Botsford<i>, 141 U.S. 250, 251 (1891), the Court has
recognized that a right of personal privacy, or a guarantee of certain areas or
zones of privacy, does exist under the Constitution. … These decisions make it
clear that only personal rights that can be deemed “fundamental” or “implicit
in the concept of ordered liberty,” </i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">Palko
v. Connecticut<i>, 302 U.S. 319, 325 (1937), are included in this guarantee of
personal privacy. They also make it clear that the right has some extension to
activities relating to marriage, </i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">Loving
v. Virginia<i>, 388 U.S. 1, 12 (1967); procreation, </i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">Skinner v. Oklahoma<i>, 316 U.S. 535, 541-542
(1942); contraception, </i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">Eisenstadt
v. Baird<i>, 405 U.S., at 453-454; id., at 460, 463-465 (WHITE, J., concurring
in result); family relationships, </i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">Prince
v. Massachusetts<i>, 321 U.S. 158, 166 (1944); and child rearing and education,
</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">Pierce v. Society of Sisters<i>, 268
U.S. 510, 535 (1925), </i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">Meyer v.
Nebraska<i>, </i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">supra<i>.<o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">410 U.S. at 152-152.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">Because its previous decisions had
extended the right to privacy to include “activities relating to marriage …
procreation … contraception … family relationships … and childrearing and
education,” the Court concluded that: <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in; mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; text-align: justify; text-autospace: none;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>[The] right of
privacy … is broad enough to encompass <b>a woman’s decision whether or not to
terminate her pregnancy</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>. <b>The
detriment that the State would impose upon the pregnant woman by denying this
choice</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i> altogether is
apparent.</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">410 U.S. at 153 (emphasis supplied).<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<a name='more'></a><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">So, the right described in <i>Roe</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"> isn’t merely the right to have a particular
medical procedure; it is the right to decide whether or not to have such a
procedure in the first instance. More broadly, the right to privacy described
in <i>Roe</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"> and (you’ll pardon the
expression) its progeny encompasses the right to make fundamental decisions
about all “activities” that fall within constitutionally protected “zones of
privacy,” such as procreation, contraception and the like. Meaning, of course,
that the state cannot decide for a woman – or a man – whether she (or he)
should be sterilized involuntarily.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">In the piece I wrote a few months back
I also pointed out that as absurd as it may seem, in the days before <i>Roe</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"> forced sterilizations actually happened right here
in these United States. Consider, for example, <a href="http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&amp;vol=274&amp;invol=200"><span style="color: #001bf4; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;"><i>Buck v. Bell</i></span></a>,
247 U.S. 200 (1927), in which “the Circuit Court of Amherst County, [Virginia,]
[ordered] … the superintendent of the State Colony for Epileptics and Feeble
Minded … to perform the operation of salpingectomy upon Carrie Buck,” (whom the
Supreme Court described as “a feeble-minded white woman”) “for the purpose of
making her sterile.” 247 U.S. at 205. The Honorable Justice Oliver Wendell
Holmes upheld that decision, because, he said, <i>“[t]hree generations of
imbeciles are enough.”</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"> <i>Id.</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"> at 207. <i>See also </i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"><a href="http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&amp;vol=316&amp;invol=535"><span style="color: #001bf4; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;"><i>Skinner v.
Oklahoma</i></span></a>, 316 U.S. 535 (1942), which struck down Oklahoma’s Habitual
Criminal Sterilization Act on equal protection grounds, but did not overrule <i>Buck
v. Bell</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">So, I said, thank goodness for <i>Roe</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">, because that case, one would think, closed the
door on such abominations. I mean, after <i>Roe</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">, decisions relating to procreation (and the
ability to procreate) are protected by the right to privacy … so the government
can’t make those decisions for you, or me, or anybody else. Right?<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">Imagine my surprise, then, when I
learned that between 2006 and 2010, doctors working for the California prison
system performed tubal ligations on 148 prisoners without following proper
legal procedures and often through coercion (a story which was <a href="http://thisweekinblackness.com/2013/07/08/chicago-gun-violence/">discussed
today on the amTWiB radio program</a>, as a matter of fact). <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><a href="http://cironline.org/reports/female-inmates-sterilized-california-prisons-without-approval-4917">According
to the Center for Investigative Reporting</a>:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>At
least 148 women received tubal ligations in violation of prison rules during
those five years – and there are perhaps 100 more dating back to the late
1990s, according to state documents and interviews.<o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>…<o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 20.0pt; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in; mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; text-align: justify; text-autospace: none;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>The women were
signed up for the surgery while they were pregnant and housed at either the
California Institution for Women in Corona or Valley State Prison for Women in
Chowchilla, which is now a men’s prison.<o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>Former
inmates and prisoner advocates maintain that prison medical staff coerced the
women, targeting those deemed likely to return to prison in the future.<o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 20.0pt; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in; mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; text-align: justify; text-autospace: none;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>Crystal Nguyen,
a former Valley State Prison inmate who worked in the prison’s infirmary during
2007, said she often overheard medical staff asking inmates who had served
multiple prison terms to agree to be sterilized.<o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 20.0pt; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in; mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; text-align: justify; text-autospace: none;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>“I was like, ‘Oh
my God, that’s not right,’ ” Nguyen, 28, said. “Do they think they’re animals,
and they don’t want them to breed anymore?”</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">The article goes on to detail a number
of situations in which female patients were pressured to agree to tubal
ligations – including one woman who “was pressured by a doctor while sedated
and strapped to a surgical table for a C-section” (she “resisted,” according to
the story). Moreover, in all 148 cases, the tubal ligations were performed
without going through procedural steps that were specifically designed to
ensure that prisoners weren’t coerced or otherwise forced to undergo
sterilizations without full consent. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">The fallout from the California story
remains to be seen. Ideally, the state will tighten its procedures to ensure that
the fundamental privacy rights of its inmates are respected. The story does,
however, reinforce a very important aspect of <i>Roe</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">, and one that’s generally overlooked in the debate
over reproductive rights: It doesn’t merely enable women to get abortions; it
prevents the government from forcing reproductive decisions on individuals.
Under <i>Roe</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">, the government can
no more compel a particular reproductive choice – say abortion, or
sterilization – than it can prevent you from making that choice. No matter how
you feel about abortion itself, that, it seems to me, is a good thing.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<!--EndFragment-->Davehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08981424431669076836noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486376351439141348.post-24569405356588499572013-07-05T14:37:00.000-05:002013-07-05T14:37:17.217-05:00Your Friday Clash Song: Killers In America Work Seven Days A Week<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="236" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/x8jca8ZATfA" width="420"></iframe><br />
<br />
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:DocumentProperties>
<o:Template>Normal</o:Template>
<o:Revision>0</o:Revision>
<o:TotalTime>0</o:TotalTime>
<o:Pages>1</o:Pages>
<o:Words>347</o:Words>
<o:Characters>1982</o:Characters>
<o:Company>Law Office of David P. von Ebers</o:Company>
<o:Lines>16</o:Lines>
<o:Paragraphs>3</o:Paragraphs>
<o:CharactersWithSpaces>2434</o:CharactersWithSpaces>
<o:Version>11.1539</o:Version>
</o:DocumentProperties>
<o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
<o:AllowPNG/>
</o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:DoNotShowRevisions/>
<w:DoNotPrintRevisions/>
<w:DisplayHorizontalDrawingGridEvery>0</w:DisplayHorizontalDrawingGridEvery>
<w:DisplayVerticalDrawingGridEvery>0</w:DisplayVerticalDrawingGridEvery>
<w:UseMarginsForDrawingGridOrigin/>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]-->
<!--StartFragment-->
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">A sort of an anti-Fourth of July theme,
I suppose. <a href="http://clash.wikia.com/wiki/I%27m_So_Bored_With_the_U.S.A.">“I’m
So Bored With The U.S.A.,”</a> which appears on both <a href="http://clash.wikia.com/wiki/The_Clash_(UK_Version)">the UK</a> and <a href="http://clash.wikia.com/wiki/The_Clash_(US_Version)">American</a> versions
of the band’s debut album, <i>The Clash</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">Not to harsh your patriotic vibe, but
this verse –<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i><a href="http://clash.wikia.com/wiki/Lyrics:I%27m_So_Bored_With_the_U.S.A.">Yankee
detectives</a><o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>Are always on the TV<o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>’Cause killers in America<o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>Work
seven days a week …<o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">Comes to mind when <a href="http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/chi-man-wounded-in-south-side-shooting-20130704,0,3358230.story">stories
like this</a> are so prominent:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>With
the long Fourth of July weekend not even half over, the toll from violence in
Chicago stood at 8 dead and more than 30 wounded this morning, including two
little boys, 5 and 7, seriously hurt while at parks with their families. <o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>The
victims since Wednesday afternoon also include a 14-year-old boy shot on the
West Side, a 16-year-old boy wounded on the South Side and a cabbie shot in the
stomach by a robber on the South Side. <o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>The
youngest victim so far is 5-year-old Jaden Donald, who was shot in the abdomen
and right leg while with his family at a party in Cooper Park on the Far South
Side shortly after midnight.<o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>…<o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>On
Thursday night, a 7-year-old boy was hit in the neck by a stray bullet at Cole
Park in the 300 block of East 85th Street, police said. He was taken in
critical condition to Advocate Christ Medical Center, according to fire
officials. </i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">“I’m So Bored With The U.S.A.” is about
much more than violence in the United States. It’s about the ubiquitous and,
I’m sure, tiresome nature of American pop culture, which crowds out and
silences deserving voices from other parts of the world. It’s about our
penchant for supporting dictators all over the world, and for being on the
wrong side of so many historical conflicts.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">But right now, when this is happening
in our own streets and we seem powerless to stop it, it’s the song’s reference
to our culture of death that resonates loudest.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>Killers in America work seven days a
week.</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">Yeah, and they work overtime in the
summer.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">Well, maybe this’ll help cheer you up.
A live version of “I’m So Bored With The U.S.A.” and “Train In Vain”:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/U0GfTXuagY0" width="420"></iframe>
<!--EndFragment-->
<br />
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:DocumentProperties>
<o:Template>Normal</o:Template>
<o:Revision>0</o:Revision>
<o:TotalTime>0</o:TotalTime>
<o:Pages>1</o:Pages>
<o:Words>13</o:Words>
<o:Characters>78</o:Characters>
<o:Company>Law Office of David P. von Ebers</o:Company>
<o:Lines>1</o:Lines>
<o:Paragraphs>1</o:Paragraphs>
<o:CharactersWithSpaces>95</o:CharactersWithSpaces>
<o:Version>11.1539</o:Version>
</o:DocumentProperties>
<o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
<o:AllowPNG/>
</o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:DoNotShowRevisions/>
<w:DoNotPrintRevisions/>
<w:DisplayHorizontalDrawingGridEvery>0</w:DisplayHorizontalDrawingGridEvery>
<w:DisplayVerticalDrawingGridEvery>0</w:DisplayVerticalDrawingGridEvery>
<w:UseMarginsForDrawingGridOrigin/>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]-->
<!--StartFragment-->
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">Nice. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">Sometimes, in the face of so much death
and despair, all you can do is …<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>Turn. It. Up.</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<!--EndFragment-->Davehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08981424431669076836noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486376351439141348.post-87259710637006965792013-07-04T16:45:00.002-05:002013-07-04T16:45:52.993-05:00Happy Fourth Of July<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/KZ314hldal4" width="420"></iframe><br />
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>The fireworks are hailin’ over Little Eden
tonight …<o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<!--EndFragment-->Davehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08981424431669076836noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486376351439141348.post-40226013304846019142013-07-03T20:04:00.000-05:002013-07-03T20:04:15.237-05:00One Time, One Night In America<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/1BxVO8Ng7F4" width="420"></iframe>
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:DocumentProperties>
<o:Template>Normal</o:Template>
<o:Revision>0</o:Revision>
<o:TotalTime>0</o:TotalTime>
<o:Pages>1</o:Pages>
<o:Words>323</o:Words>
<o:Characters>1844</o:Characters>
<o:Company>Law Office of David P. von Ebers</o:Company>
<o:Lines>15</o:Lines>
<o:Paragraphs>3</o:Paragraphs>
<o:CharactersWithSpaces>2264</o:CharactersWithSpaces>
<o:Version>11.1539</o:Version>
</o:DocumentProperties>
<o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
<o:AllowPNG/>
</o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:DoNotShowRevisions/>
<w:DoNotPrintRevisions/>
<w:DisplayHorizontalDrawingGridEvery>0</w:DisplayHorizontalDrawingGridEvery>
<w:DisplayVerticalDrawingGridEvery>0</w:DisplayVerticalDrawingGridEvery>
<w:UseMarginsForDrawingGridOrigin/>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]-->
<!--StartFragment-->
<br />
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">“Damani Henard had been playing video
games with his friend and was about halfway home,” <a href="http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/chi-shootings-violence-20130702,0,7091843.story">says
the <i>Chicago Tribune</i></a>, “when shots rang out in the 5000 block of West
North Avenue.” The story continues:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>“The
detectives came to my sister’s house. They found him laying dead. He was shot
once in the head and once in the back of the shoulder,” said Keshia Paige, the
boy’s aunt. “He was coming from a friend’s home, going back to Oak Park. It’s
maybe a 15-minute ride, a straight shot on North Avenue. He begins at North and
Keeler and goes to North and Lombard.”<o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">Lombard Avenue runs parallel to the
street I live on, a few blocks to the east.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">Damani Henard was fourteen years old.
The same age as our son Mark (for another couple of weeks, anyway). He was
killed on the way back to his house in the town where we live, coming home from
the west side of Chicago just a short distance away. He would have attended Oak
Park River and Forest High School in the fall, where Mark will be a sophomore
and our older son, Paul, will be a senior.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">Tomorrow night, my wife and I and our
kids will go to the high school to watch the fireworks like we do every 4th of
July. We’ll probably sit in the grandstands at the football stadium where
Damani might have played, if he had been lucky enough to make the team. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">If he had been lucky enough to live.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">I hate like hell when tragedy happens
and somebody on the news says, <i>Things like that don’t happen here</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">. Or, <i>Things like that don’t happen to people
who live here</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">. They happen here.
They happen to people who live here. They happen just a short distance away, on
the west side of Chicago, where people don’t have the privilege to live in the
relative safety of our little suburb. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">It’s easy to pretend that where Damani
was killed was, you know, <i>over there</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">. In Chicago. Across some imaginary border that separates kids who get
killed from kids who live to go to high school. You know what I think? I think
we say that, because we want to believe that that border separates more than
municipalities. It separates <i>us</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">
from <i>them</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">But Damani Henard was <i>us</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>One more light goes out in America …<o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<!--EndFragment-->Davehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08981424431669076836noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486376351439141348.post-78305178637126803342013-07-02T21:45:00.001-05:002013-07-02T21:45:46.765-05:00Pro Tip: Don’t Get Your Legal Advice From Edward Snowden<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-26s6hn-IJMs/UdOPuyfZOVI/AAAAAAAACFE/q5znI35Ic8c/s1056/Snowden+Cole.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="151" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-26s6hn-IJMs/UdOPuyfZOVI/AAAAAAAACFE/q5znI35Ic8c/s400/Snowden+Cole.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:DocumentProperties>
<o:Template>Normal</o:Template>
<o:Revision>0</o:Revision>
<o:TotalTime>0</o:TotalTime>
<o:Pages>1</o:Pages>
<o:Words>950</o:Words>
<o:Characters>5420</o:Characters>
<o:Company>Law Office of David P. von Ebers</o:Company>
<o:Lines>45</o:Lines>
<o:Paragraphs>10</o:Paragraphs>
<o:CharactersWithSpaces>6656</o:CharactersWithSpaces>
<o:Version>11.1539</o:Version>
</o:DocumentProperties>
<o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
<o:AllowPNG/>
</o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:DoNotShowRevisions/>
<w:DoNotPrintRevisions/>
<w:DisplayHorizontalDrawingGridEvery>0</w:DisplayHorizontalDrawingGridEvery>
<w:DisplayVerticalDrawingGridEvery>0</w:DisplayVerticalDrawingGridEvery>
<w:UseMarginsForDrawingGridOrigin/>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]-->
<!--StartFragment-->
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">If Edward Snowden were a superhero, I’m
pretty sure his superpower would be the ability to make otherwise intelligent
people say remarkably stupid things. <a href="http://www.juancole.com/2013/07/snowden-deprivation-citizenship.html">This
post</a> from University of Michigan professor and Middle East expert Juan Cole
is a prime example:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i><a href="http://wikileaks.org/Statement-from-Edward-Snowden-in.html?snow"><span style="color: windowtext; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;"><b>Edward
Snowden released a statement from Moscow</b></span></a> on Monday, slamming
Barack Obama for revoking his passport and rendering him stateless and unable
to seek asylum even though Snowden has not been found guilty of any crime. (The
US denies that revoking a passport is the same as deprivation of citizenship,
but in this case it is hard to see the difference.[)]<o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">Um, no. To argue that revoking
Snowden’s passport is tantamount to revoking his citizenship is, in the
language of my people, <i>patently frivolous</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<a name='more'></a><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; text-align: justify; text-autospace: none;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">The authority to revoke a passport stems from <a href="http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/uscode/22/4/211a">22 U.S.C. § 211a</a>, which
empowers the Secretary of State to “grant and issue passports … under such
rules as the President shall designate and prescribe for and on behalf of the
United States.” By <a href="http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/codification/executive-order/11295.html">Executive
Order 11295</a>, Pres. Johnson delegated that rulemaking authority to the
Secretary of State, “without the approval, ratification, or other action of the
President,” and the State Department then issued regulations governing
passports which are codified at <a href="http://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/22/51">22 CFR Part 51</a>.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; text-align: justify; text-autospace: none;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">With regard to revocation, <a href="http://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/22/51.62">22 CFR § 51.62</a> provides
that “[t]he Department may revoke … a passport when … [t]he bearer of the
passport may be denied a passport under 22 CFR [§] </span><span style="color: blue; font-family: LucidaGrande;"><a href="http://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/22/51.60"><span style="font-family: Georgia;">51.60</span></a></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"> or </span><span style="color: blue; font-family: LucidaGrande;"><a href="http://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/22/51.61"><span style="font-family: Georgia;">51.61</span></a></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">.” 22 CFR §
51.62(a)(1). <a href="http://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/22/51.60">22 CFR §
51.60</a>, in turn, provides that a passport can be denied “in any case in
which the Department determines or is informed by competent authority that …
[t]he applicant is the subject of an outstanding Federal warrant of arrest for
a felony … .” 22 CFR § 51.60(b)(1). Reading Sections 51.62 and 51.60 together,
then, the State Department has the power to revoke a passport in any case where
the individual holding the passport is the subject of a federal arrest warrant
for a felony. Which, of course, applies to Snowden.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; text-align: justify; text-autospace: none;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">None of this, of course, has anything to do with
revocation of <i>citizenship</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">,
which is governed by Section 1481 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, <a href="http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/uscode/8/12/III/III/1481">8 U.S.C. § 1481</a>.
Section 1481(a) provides an exclusive list of the ways in which natural born
American citizen can lose his or her citizenship: By “voluntarily performing”
one of the enumerated acts “with the intention of relinquishing United States
nationality.” Those acts include, among other things, becoming a naturalized
citizen of another country; taking an oath of allegiance to another country;
joining another country’s military, if that country is at war with the U.S. or
if the individual becomes a commissioned officer in that country’s military;
making a formal renunciation of U.S. citizenship; and committing treason. <i>See</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"> 8 U.S.C. § 1481(a)(1) through (7).<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; text-align: justify; text-autospace: none;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">The Supreme Court held in <i><a href="http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=case&amp;court=us&amp;vol=444&amp;invol=252">Vance
v. Terrazas</a></i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">, 444 U.S. 252,
259-60 (1980), that Congress has no “general power, express or implied, to take
away an American citizen’s citizenship without his assent,” quoting <i><a href="http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?navby=case&amp;court=us&amp;vol=387&amp;invol=253">Afroyim
v. Rusk</a></i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">, 387 U.S. 253, 257
(1967). Accordingly, the Court held that, in order to expatriate a natural born
citizen, the government must prove not only that the citizen voluntarily
committed one of the acts enumerated in Section 1481(a), but that he or she did
so with the specific intent to relinquish his or her citizenship. <i><a href="http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=case&amp;court=us&amp;vol=444&amp;invol=252">Terrazas</a></i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">, 444 U.S. at 261. So both parts of that test –
that the individual has done something inconsistent with U.S. citizenship, and
that he or she did so with the specific intent to renounce citizenship – are
written into the statute.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; text-align: justify; text-autospace: none;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">In Snowden’s case, the Obama Administration has
never asserted that Snowden committed <i>any</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"> of the acts enumerated in Section 1481 of the Immigration and
Nationality Act, let alone that he did so with the intent to surrender his U.S.
citizenship; nor, of course, has the Administration commenced proceedings to
revoke Snowden’s citizenship under applicable law. More to the point, the idea
that revoking Snowden’s <i>passport</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">,
which effectively prevents him from traveling outside the United States, is the
equivalent of revoking his <i>citizenship</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">, is absurd. In fact, if anything, revoking Snowden’s passport has the
opposite effect. Rather than rendering him <a href="http://www.juancole.com/2013/07/snowden-deprivation-citizenship.html">“stateless,”</a>
as he so dramatically put it, it means that he should be required to <i>return
to the United States</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">. Naturally,
he doesn’t want to do that because then he’ll have to face the charges against
him. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; text-align: justify; text-autospace: none;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">You might ask why I care whether Snowden
understands the legal distinction between revoking a passport and revoking
citizenship. In fact, I don’t. What I <i>do</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"> care about, however, is that every time Snowden speaks, his words –
however absurd or illogical – ricochet around the internet as though they’re
gospel truth. <a href="http://thisweekinblackness.com/2013/06/24/no-edward-snowden-has-not-committed-treason/">As
I’ve argued before</a>, the cult of personality surrounding the key figures in
the NSA surveillance dustup – Snowden, Glenn Greenwald, President Obama –
serves only to obscure the important civil liberties issues at stake here. And
that’s compounded when otherwise smart people like Juan Cole provide a bullhorn
to amplify even the craziest legal theories this 29-year-old kid espouses.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; text-align: justify; text-autospace: none;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">Poor Prof. Cole. If only there was some way a guy
who works for a major university with a top-ranked law school could get
competent legal advice <i>other than </i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">from
a high school dropout …<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<!--EndFragment-->Davehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08981424431669076836noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486376351439141348.post-24282707022630482912013-07-01T21:23:00.000-05:002013-07-01T21:23:30.949-05:00Abortion Protests, Death Porn, And Hypocrisy: A Day In The Life Of The First Amendment<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-ulSAFbIKAVs/UdI4-SKb0VI/AAAAAAAACE0/cHT7in3v2WY/s972/Anti-Abortion+Protest+in+Oak+Park.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="132" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-ulSAFbIKAVs/UdI4-SKb0VI/AAAAAAAACE0/cHT7in3v2WY/s400/Anti-Abortion+Protest+in+Oak+Park.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:DocumentProperties>
<o:Template>Normal</o:Template>
<o:Revision>0</o:Revision>
<o:TotalTime>0</o:TotalTime>
<o:Pages>1</o:Pages>
<o:Words>1049</o:Words>
<o:Characters>5984</o:Characters>
<o:Company>Law Office of David P. von Ebers</o:Company>
<o:Lines>49</o:Lines>
<o:Paragraphs>11</o:Paragraphs>
<o:CharactersWithSpaces>7348</o:CharactersWithSpaces>
<o:Version>11.1539</o:Version>
</o:DocumentProperties>
<o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
<o:AllowPNG/>
</o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:DoNotShowRevisions/>
<w:DoNotPrintRevisions/>
<w:DisplayHorizontalDrawingGridEvery>0</w:DisplayHorizontalDrawingGridEvery>
<w:DisplayVerticalDrawingGridEvery>0</w:DisplayVerticalDrawingGridEvery>
<w:UseMarginsForDrawingGridOrigin/>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]-->
<!--StartFragment-->
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">Over the past couple of months, the
death porn merchants at <a href="http://prolifeaction.org/">Pro-Life Action
League</a>, a Chicago-based anti-abortion group, have been picketing in my
quiet little suburb just west of the city. <a href="http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2013-05-29/news/ct-tl-oakpark-abortion-20130528_1_south-wind-women-kansas-abortion-clinic-julie-burkhart">As
the <i>Chicago Tribune</i><span style="font-style: normal;"> reported in May</span></a>,
the subject of the group’s ire is Dr. Cheryl Chastine, a local obstetrician who
“helped open the South Wind Women’s Clinic [in Wichita, Kansas] in the same
location where [murdered physician] George Tiller ran a clinic.”<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">The first time these lovely individuals
protested in the vicinity of Dr. Chastine’s office, they did so on a Wednesday
afternoon in late May. I mention that because the location of their protest
happened to be about three blocks from my daughter’s elementary school, which
is kindergarten through fifth grade, and three to four blocks from Ascension
Catholic School, which is kindergarten through eighth grade. So, the protesters
timed their actions in such a way that they were almost certain to confront
young school children on their way home from school. Perhaps unknown to the
protest’s organizers, they also picketed right in front of an extremely popular
frozen custard shop that had just reopened for the summer season – a shop
that’s been around since I was a kid, and that attracts a huge (and, of course,
very young) customer base. Oh, and the site of the protest was also a few
blocks from a public swimming pool, which is also popular with families and
children.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">Last Wednesday morning they were at it
again, protesting in front of Dr. Chastine’s office, marching up and down the
street by the custard shop, just a few blocks from the public pool on an
otherwise blissful day in June. And in the midst of their protest, I happened to
drive by with my 11 year old daughter en route to her summer school program at
the middle school about a mile away. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<a name='more'></a><span style="font-family: Georgia;">Before I could tell her to avert her
eyes, my daughter caught sight of their grotesque signs. You probably know what
I’m referring to: Huge, poster-sized images of bloody, dismembered fetuses. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">Charming. And undoubtedly designed to
engage reasonable people in an honest debate, right?<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">Setting aside the question whether the
protesters <i>support</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"> the acts of
the terrorist who killed Dr. Tiller (and, yes, Scott Roeder, who committed a
violent felony in order to influence public policy, meets <a href="http://thisweekinblackness.com/2013/04/17/terrorism-hate-crimes-theyre-not-that-different/">the
definition of “terrorist” under federal law</a>), I’m not prepared to let them,
or anybody else, tell me when I’m supposed to discuss abortion with my 11 year
old daughter. So, I was, shall we say, more than a little peeved that these
folks chose to shove their violent, explicit images in her face that morning.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">After thinking about it for a day or
so, I decided to contact the local constabulary to ask them, you know, <i>What
the actual fuck?!</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"> How is it that a
group of strangers can march down the streets of our town in broad daylight,
exposing innocent children (including one of mine) to disgusting, graphic
images of what, to <i>them</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">, is
murder, and what, to any decent person regardless of political persuasion, is,
at best, grossly inappropriate. Emphasis on <i>gross</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">The response I got was predictable:
Gee, we’re sorry, but we asked the “Interim Village Attorney” (who, like the
Wizard of Oz, is apparently only known by his/her title), and he/she advised us
that we can’t regulate the content of their signs. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">Truth be told, I’m more or less an
absolutist when it comes to the First Amendment. So, I empathize with the
nameless, faceless Interim Village Attorney’s position. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">In fact, though, it’s an open legal
question. Last month <a href="http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Justice/2013/0610/Can-protesters-wave-gruesome-signs-Supreme-Court-declines-free-speech-case">the
<i>Christian Science Monitor</i><span style="font-style: normal;"> reported</span></a>:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>The <a href="http://www.csmonitor.com/tags/topic/U.S.+Supreme+Court"><span style="color: windowtext; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">US Supreme
Court</span></a> declined on Monday [June 10, 2013] to take up a potentially
important <a href="http://www.csmonitor.com/tags/topic/First+Amendment"><span style="color: windowtext; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">First
Amendment case</span></a> that would have examined whether a <a href="http://www.csmonitor.com/tags/topic/Colorado"><span style="color: windowtext; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">Colorado</span></a> appeals court
ignored fundamental free-speech protections when it upheld a court order
blocking antiabortion protesters from waving poster-sized photos of aborted
fetuses at members of a church engaged in an Easter procession.<o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>The
case sought to test the scope of a demonstrator’s right to use gruesome images
as part of an attempt to deliver an effective message in a protest on a public
street.<o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>The
targeted church, St. John’s in the Wilderness Episcopal Church in <a href="http://www.csmonitor.com/tags/topic/Denver"><span style="color: windowtext; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">Denver</span></a>, sued the
protesters, arguing that the demonstration disrupted the religious procession
and subjected young children to graphic and disturbing images during what was
meant to be an inspiring display of religious devotion.<o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>The
injunction was issued after the church sued the protesters for creating a
public nuisance and disrupting its services.<o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">As an aside, the fact that the Colorado
protests occurred in the vicinity of a church shouldn’t matter. Churches don’t
have any greater right to limit the free speech rights of protesters than you
or I. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">Regardless, though, the real question
is this: How seriously do we take the notion that the content of a protest sign
is <i>absolutely</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"> beyond government
regulation in all circumstances? Are we really prepared to say you can put <i>any
image</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">, no matter how vile, on a
sheet of poster board, staple it to a piece of wood, and it’s magically
insulated from any legal objection whatsoever, wherever you happen to tote it? <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">Imagine, for instance, that some group
wants to protest against the Catholic Church’s position on same sex marriage –
or, for that matter, against the expansion of equal marriage rights for gays
and lesbians in certain states – and, in connection with that protest, they
carry posters with images of gay couples (ahem) <i>in flagrante delicto</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">, so to speak. Either because they think it’s a
beautiful expression of love between consenting adults, or because they think
it’s an abomination and they want the world to see just how … er … <i>abominable</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"> it is. Do you seriously think that local
authorities would say, as they’ve said to the anti-abortion death-porn folks: <i>Sure,
go ahead. Put whatever images you want on your signs. There’s nothing we can do
about it.</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">In a word: Bullshit. The cops would
arrest the gay-porn-sign-carrying protesters in a heartbeat. <i>I
guaran-damn-tee it.</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"> Because as
much as we like to talk about freedom of speech in this country, there’s no
question that explicit, violent imagery is protected to a much greater extent
than sexual imagery – especially when that explicit, violent imagery is used in
support of a right-wing cause. And for what reason? Because sex is <i>icky</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">, but chopped up fetuses are … what? Important
political commentary? Give me a break.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">But that’s the way the First Amendment
works, apparently. Some speakers are more equal than others.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<!--EndFragment-->Davehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08981424431669076836noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486376351439141348.post-90440609158198395072013-06-28T16:46:00.000-05:002013-06-28T16:46:42.140-05:00Your Friday Clash Song: You’re Not Searching, Are You Now?<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/BKWO-wgzf20" width="420"></iframe><br />
<br />
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:DocumentProperties>
<o:Template>Normal</o:Template>
<o:Revision>0</o:Revision>
<o:TotalTime>0</o:TotalTime>
<o:Pages>1</o:Pages>
<o:Words>136</o:Words>
<o:Characters>780</o:Characters>
<o:Company>Law Office of David P. von Ebers</o:Company>
<o:Lines>6</o:Lines>
<o:Paragraphs>1</o:Paragraphs>
<o:CharactersWithSpaces>957</o:CharactersWithSpaces>
<o:Version>11.1539</o:Version>
</o:DocumentProperties>
<o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
<o:AllowPNG/>
</o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:DoNotShowRevisions/>
<w:DoNotPrintRevisions/>
<w:DisplayHorizontalDrawingGridEvery>0</w:DisplayHorizontalDrawingGridEvery>
<w:DisplayVerticalDrawingGridEvery>0</w:DisplayVerticalDrawingGridEvery>
<w:UseMarginsForDrawingGridOrigin/>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]-->
<!--StartFragment-->
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><a href="http://clash.wikia.com/wiki/Four_Horsemen">“Four Horsemen,”</a> from <i><a href="http://clash.wikia.com/wiki/London_Calling_(album)">London Calling</a></i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"> (1979).<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">After delving into some of their more
experimental music over the past few weeks, a punk-ier tune seemed appropriate.
This is one of the lesser known tracks from <i>London Calling</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">, but it’s pretty phenomenal. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">I’m not entirely sure what they’re
going for here, but I presume they’re jokingly referring to themselves as the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Horsemen_of_the_Apocalypse">Four
Horsemen of the Apocalypse</a>, which is fitting given the apocalyptic theme of
the album’s title track. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">Regardless, after a week of ups and
downs – the Blackhawks winning on Monday, the Supreme Court rolling back the
Voting Rights Act Tuesday, the Court striking down a key provision of the
Defense of Marriage Act Wednesday – it’s as good a time as any to …<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>Turn. It. Up.<o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<!--EndFragment-->Davehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08981424431669076836noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486376351439141348.post-86482511491397225692013-06-27T20:37:00.000-05:002013-06-27T20:37:23.970-05:00SCOTUS, DOMA, And The Rational Basis Test<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-e9I2CE9x35I/UczoHESK8SI/AAAAAAAACEk/oLERFxVpvNM/s964/Supreme+Court+Rainbow+Flag.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="153" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-e9I2CE9x35I/UczoHESK8SI/AAAAAAAACEk/oLERFxVpvNM/s400/Supreme+Court+Rainbow+Flag.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:DocumentProperties>
<o:Template>Normal</o:Template>
<o:Revision>0</o:Revision>
<o:TotalTime>0</o:TotalTime>
<o:Pages>1</o:Pages>
<o:Words>1227</o:Words>
<o:Characters>6997</o:Characters>
<o:Company>Law Office of David P. von Ebers</o:Company>
<o:Lines>58</o:Lines>
<o:Paragraphs>13</o:Paragraphs>
<o:CharactersWithSpaces>8592</o:CharactersWithSpaces>
<o:Version>11.1539</o:Version>
</o:DocumentProperties>
<o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
<o:AllowPNG/>
</o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:DoNotShowRevisions/>
<w:DoNotPrintRevisions/>
<w:DisplayHorizontalDrawingGridEvery>0</w:DisplayHorizontalDrawingGridEvery>
<w:DisplayVerticalDrawingGridEvery>0</w:DisplayVerticalDrawingGridEvery>
<w:UseMarginsForDrawingGridOrigin/>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]-->
<!--StartFragment-->
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">During oral arguments in <i><a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pdf/12-144_8ok0.pdf">Hollingsworth
v. Perry</a></i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">, No. 12-144 (U.S.
Sup. Ct., June 26, 2013) (.pdf file), the case attacking California’s
Proposition 8, <a href="http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-antonin-scalia-surprising-tame-in-gay-marriage-hearing-20130326,0,2907931.story">Justice
Antonin Scalia asked a sarcastic question</a>:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>I’m
curious. When did it become unconstitutional to exclude homosexual couples from
marriage? 1791? 1868, when the 14th Amendment was adopted? When did the law
become this?</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">Wednesday, a majority of the Court
provided at least a partial answer to that question in <i><a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pdf/12-307_g2bh.pdf">United States
v. Windsor</a></i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">, No. 12-307 (U.S.
Sup. Ct., June 26, 2013) (.pdf), which struck down Section 3 of the federal
Defense of Marriage Act. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>Windsor</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"> dealt with the <a href="http://constitution.findlaw.com/amendment5/amendment.html">Fifth
Amendment</a>’s Due Process Clause, as opposed to the Equal Protection Clause
of the <a href="http://constitution.findlaw.com/amendment14/amendment.html">Fourteenth
Amendment</a>, but the Court long ago acknowledged that Fifth Amendment due
process includes an “equal protection component” applicable to the federal
government. <i>See <a href="http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=case&amp;court=us&amp;vol=347&amp;page=497">Bolling
v. Sharpe</a></i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">, 347 U.S. 497, 499
(1954). So, in <i>Windsor</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">, the
Court relied on equal protection analysis when it reached this conclusion with
regard to Section 3 of DOMA:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>The
federal statute is invalid, for no legitimate purpose overcomes the purpose and
effect to disparage and to injure those whom the State, by its marriage laws,
sought to protect in personhood and dignity. By seeking to displace this
protection and treating those persons as living in marriages less respected
than others, the federal statute is in violation of the Fifth Amendment.<o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; text-align: justify; text-autospace: none;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i><a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pdf/12-307_6j37.pdf">Windsor</a></i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">, slip op. at 25-26.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<a name='more'></a><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; text-align: justify; text-autospace: none;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">In other words, the Court is saying that no
rational basis exists for the federal government to deny benefits to same-sex
couples lawfully married under state law, and therefore Section 3 of DOMA
violated the equal protection component of the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process
Clause. In so doing, the Court essentially answered Justice Scalia’s question with
regard to “when [it became] unconstitutional to exclude homosexual couples from
marriage.”<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; text-align: justify; text-autospace: none;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">Let me explain. A lot of people – including,
apparently, Justice Scalia – seem to labor under the misapprehension that the
concept of “equal protection under the law” embodied in both the Fifth and the
Fourteenth Amendments prohibits government discrimination only on the basis of
“suspect” classifications like race or gender, and, as yet, the Court hasn’t
declared sexual orientation to be a suspect classification. In fact, though,
the Equal Protection Clause itself makes no reference to race, gender, or any
other classification at all. What is says is:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>No
State shall … deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection
of the laws.</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; text-align: justify; text-autospace: none;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><a href="http://constitution.findlaw.com/amendment15/amendment.html"><span style="color: #001bf4; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">U.S. Const.,
Amend. XIV, § 1</span></a>.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; text-align: justify; text-autospace: none;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">So the Equal Protection Clause, on its face, is a
more general prohibition against the government engaging in discriminatory
treatment of similarly situated people or groups of people. The Supreme Court
has traditionally subjected government discrimination on the basis of, say,
race or gender, to a higher level of judicial scrutiny than other forms of
discrimination, but that does not mean that discrimination on bases <i>other than</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"> race, gender, and the like, will necessarily pass
equal protection muster.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; text-align: justify; text-autospace: none;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">As the Court explained in <a href="http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=case&amp;court=us&amp;vol=427&amp;page=297"><span style="color: #001bf4; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;"><i>City of New
Orleans v. Dukes</i></span></a>, 427 U.S. 297, 303 (1976):<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in; mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; text-align: justify; text-autospace: none;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>Unless a
classification trammels fundamental personal rights or is drawn upon inherently
suspect distinctions such as race, religion, or alienage, our decisions presume
the constitutionality of the statutory discriminations and require only that
the classification challenged be rationally related to a legitimate state
interest.</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; text-align: justify; text-autospace: none;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">Stated differently, any form of discrimination
that’s <i>not</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"> “rationally related
to a legitimate state interest” <i>will</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"> violate equal protection, even if it’s not based upon a suspect
classification. More directly, in<i> <a href="http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=case&amp;court=us&amp;vol=517&amp;page=620"><span style="color: #001bf4; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">Roemer v. Evans</span></a></i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">, 517 U.S. 620 (1996), the Court said, “[b]y
requiring that [a non-suspect] classification bear a rational relationship to
an independent and legitimate legislative end, we ensure that classifications
are not drawn for the purpose of disadvantaging the group burdened by the law.”<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">So, when the Court said in <i>Windsor</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"> that Section 3 of DOMA is “invalid” because “no
legitimate purpose overcomes the purpose and effect to disparage and to injure
those whom the State, by its marriage laws, sought to protect in personhood and
dignity,” <a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pdf/12-307_6j37.pdf">slip.
op.</a> at 25-26, the Court is saying that Section 3 failed under the “rational
basis” test. Now, the Court also said, “<span style="color: black;">[t]his
opinion and its holding are confined to those lawful marriages” (<i>id.</i></span><span style="color: black;"> at 26) – <i>i.e.</i></span><span style="color: black;">,
marriages between same sex partners that are legal under state law – in an
apparent attempt to limit the effect of its ruling. But it’s hard to see how
the rationale of <i>Windsor</i></span><span style="color: black;"> wouldn’t apply
equally to laws prohibiting gay and lesbian couples from entering into marriage
on the same terms as heterosexual marriages. <o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="color: black; font-family: Georgia;">Circling back, then, to
Justice Scalia’s question about the Fourteenth Amendment: Equal protection has <i>always</i></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Georgia;"> banned irrational discrimination in
the law; and if there’s no rational basis to discriminate against gay and
lesbian couples in marriage laws … well, there’s your answer.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="color: black; font-family: Georgia;">It’s unfortunate, though,
that the Court in <i>Windsor</i></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Georgia;"> didn’t adopt the Obama Administration’s position with regard to
marriage equality. As the Court noted:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: justify;">
<span style="color: black; font-family: Georgia;"><i>While the [underlying] suit was pending, the Attorney General of
the United States notified the Speaker of the House of Representatives,
pursuant to 28 U. S. C. §530D, that the Department of Justice would no longer
defend the constitutionality of DOMA’s §3. Noting that “the Depart</i></span><span style="color: black;"><i>­</i></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Georgia;"><i>ment
has previously defended DOMA against . . . chal</i></span><span style="color: black;"><i>­</i></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Georgia;"><i>lenges
involving legally married same-sex couples,” App. 184, the Attorney General
informed Congress that <b>“the President has concluded that given a number of
factors, including a documented history of discrimination, classifi</b></i></span><span style="color: black;"><b><i>­</i></b></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Georgia;"><b><i>cations based on sexual orientation should be subject to a
heightened standard of scrutiny.”</i></b></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Georgia;"><i> </i></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Georgia;">Id.<i>,
at 191.<o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i><a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pdf/12-307_6j37.pdf">Windsor</a></i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">, slip op. at 3 (emphasis supplied).<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">Indeed, he did. You can read the
Attorney General’s letter to Speaker Boehner <a href="http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2011/February/11-ag-223.html">here</a>. In
it, the Attorney General explains:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in; mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; text-align: justify; text-autospace: none;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>The Supreme
Court has … rendered a number of decisions that set forth the criteria that
should inform this and any other judgment as to whether heightened scrutiny
applies: &nbsp; (1) whether the group in question has suffered a history of
discrimination; (2) whether individuals “exhibit obvious, immutable, or
distinguishing characteristics that define them as a discrete group”; (3)
whether the group is a minority or is politically powerless; and (4) whether
the characteristics distinguishing the group have little relation to legitimate
policy objectives or to an individual’s “ability to perform or contribute to
society.” &nbsp; </i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">See Bowen v.
Gilliard<i>, 483 U.S. 587, 602-03 (1987); </i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">City of Cleburne v. Cleburne Living Ctr.<i>, 473 U.S. 432, 441-42
(1985). &nbsp;<o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>Each
of these factors counsels in favor of being suspicious of classifications based
on sexual orientation.</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">It’s well worth taking the time to read
the entire letter.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">In any event, because DOMA’s Section 3
could not even pass the rational basis test, <i>Windsor</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"> was not the case to determine whether anti-gay
discrimination should be subject to heightened scrutiny like discrimination on
the basis of race and sex, and so that remains an open question. It’s nice to
know, though, that our President thinks it should.&nbsp;<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<!--EndFragment-->Davehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08981424431669076836noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486376351439141348.post-54584420064630414872013-06-26T21:14:00.000-05:002013-06-26T21:14:27.776-05:00SCOTUS to UT Austin: Affirmative Action Ain’t Easy<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-l3NQxMY0HSU/UcufTLy3WiI/AAAAAAAACEU/uZYLivrlIUU/s1600/Abigail+Fisher.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="170" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-l3NQxMY0HSU/UcufTLy3WiI/AAAAAAAACEU/uZYLivrlIUU/s400/Abigail+Fisher.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:DocumentProperties>
<o:Template>Normal</o:Template>
<o:Revision>0</o:Revision>
<o:TotalTime>0</o:TotalTime>
<o:Pages>1</o:Pages>
<o:Words>1278</o:Words>
<o:Characters>7285</o:Characters>
<o:Company>Law Office of David P. von Ebers</o:Company>
<o:Lines>60</o:Lines>
<o:Paragraphs>14</o:Paragraphs>
<o:CharactersWithSpaces>8946</o:CharactersWithSpaces>
<o:Version>11.1539</o:Version>
</o:DocumentProperties>
<o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
<o:AllowPNG/>
</o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:DoNotShowRevisions/>
<w:DoNotPrintRevisions/>
<w:DisplayHorizontalDrawingGridEvery>0</w:DisplayHorizontalDrawingGridEvery>
<w:DisplayVerticalDrawingGridEvery>0</w:DisplayVerticalDrawingGridEvery>
<w:UseMarginsForDrawingGridOrigin/>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]-->
<!--StartFragment-->
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">Nothing is ever easy with the United
States Supreme Court. Take, for example, <i><a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pdf/11-345_l5gm.pdf">Fisher v.
University of Texas at Austin</a></i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">,
No. 11-345 (U.S. Sup. Ct., June 24, 2013) (.pdf file), one of Monday’s more
notable decisions, which involves the legality of the University of Texas’
affirmative action policy under <i><a href="http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=case&amp;court=us&amp;vol=539&amp;page=244">Gratz
v. Bollinger</a></i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">, 539 U.S. 244
(2003), <i><a href="http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=case&amp;court=us&amp;vol=539&amp;page=306">Grutter
v. Bollinger</a></i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">, 539 U.S. 306
(2003), and <i><a href="http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=case&amp;court=us&amp;vol=438&amp;page=265">Regents
of the University of California v. Bakke</a></i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">, 438 U.S. 265 (1978).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">In <i>Fisher</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">, the plaintiff, a white woman who was denied
admission into the University’s flagship institution, sued the University and
various officials, claiming that its admissions policies violated the Equal
Protection Clause of the <a href="http://constitution.findlaw.com/amendment14/amendment.html">Fourteenth
Amendment</a>. Specifically, she challenged the affirmative action policy the
University put into place following the Supreme Court’s rulings in <i>Grutter</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"> and <i>Gratz</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">, which partially upheld similar admissions policies at the University
of Michigan: <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: justify;">
<span style="color: black; font-family: Georgia;"><i>In </i></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Georgia;">Grutter<i>,
the Court upheld the use of race as one of many “plus factors” in an admissions
program that considered the overall individual contribution of each candidate.
In </i></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Georgia;">Gratz<i>, by
contrast, the Court held unconstitutional Michi­gan’s undergraduate admissions
program, which automat­ically awarded points to applicants from certain racial
minorities.</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i><o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i><a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pdf/11-345_l5gm.pdf">Fisher</a></i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">, slip op. at 3-4.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<a name='more'></a><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">Following <i>Grutter</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"> and <i>Gratz</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">, the University of Texas undertook a study which “<span style="color: black;">concluded that the University lacked a ‘critical mass’ of
minority students and that to remedy the deficiency it was necessary to give
explicit consideration to race in the undergraduate admissions program.</span>”
<i><a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pdf/11-345_l5gm.pdf">Fisher</a></i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">, slip op. at 4. Consequently, the University began
to include an applicant’s race in his or her “Personal Achievement Index”
score, which is used, along with an “Academic Index” score, to determine
admissions:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: justify;">
<span style="color: black; font-family: Georgia;"><i>Once applications have been scored, they are plotted on a grid
with the Academic Index on the x-axis and the Personal Achievement Index on the
y-axis. On that grid students are assigned to so-called cells based on their
individual scores. All students in the cells falling above a certain line are
admitted. All students below the line are not.</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i><a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pdf/11-345_l5gm.pdf">Id</a></i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">After being denied admission in 2008,
Abigail Fisher sued the University in the U.S.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>District Court for the Western District of Texas. The
District Court upheld the University’s affirmative action policy, and the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit affirmed that decision. <i><a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pdf/11-345_l5gm.pdf">Fisher</a></i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">, slip op. at 5. The Supreme Court vacated the
Fifth Circuit’s ruling, and sent the case back for further consideration in
light of the Court’s opinion. <i>Id.</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">,
at 13.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">To make sense of the <i>Fisher</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"> ruling, it’s important to understand that while <a href="http://constitution.findlaw.com/amendment14/amendment.html">the
Fourteenth Amendment provides</a> that “[n]o State shall … deny to any person
within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws,” that does not mean
that states and their political subdivisions are barred from making rules that
take race into consideration in all circumstances. Rather, it means, as the <i>Fisher</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"> Court explained, that whenever a state agency
enacts rules based in part on race, those rules must withstand “strict
scrutiny” – <i>i.e.</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">, they must be
narrowly tailored to meet a compelling government interest. In the context of a
public university’s admissions process, <i>Fisher</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">, relying on Justice Powell’s opinion for the Court
in <i>Bakke</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">, held that “<span style="color: black;">[r]edressing past discrimination could not serve as a
compelling interest” sufficient to uphold an affirmative action policy, but
that “[t]he attainment of a diverse student body” <i>might</i></span><span style="color: black;">.</span> <i><a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pdf/11-345_l5gm.pdf">Fisher</a></i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">, slip op. at 6. The Court explained:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in; mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; text-align: justify; text-autospace: none;">
<span style="color: black; font-family: Georgia;"><i>In </i></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Georgia;">Grutter<i>, the Court reaffirmed
[Justice Powell’s] conclusion that obtaining the educational benefits of
“student body diversity is a compelling state interest that can justify the use
of race in uni</i></span><span style="color: black; font-family: &quot;Century Schoolbook&quot;;"><i>­</i></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Georgia;"><i>versity
admissions.” [539 U. S.] at 325. <o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: justify;">
<span style="color: black; font-family: Georgia;"><i>[But] this follows only if a clear precondition is met: The
particular admis</i></span><span style="color: black; font-family: &quot;Century Schoolbook&quot;;"><i>­</i></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Georgia;"><i>sions
process used for this objective is subject to judicial review. Race may not be
considered unless the admissions process can withstand strict scrutiny. … “To
be narrowly tailored, a race-conscious admissions program cannot use a quota
system,” </i></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Georgia;">Grutter<i>,
539 U. S., at 334, but instead must “remain flexible enough to ensure that each
applicant is evaluated as an individual and not in a way that makes an
applicant’s race or ethnicity the defining feature of his or her application,” </i></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Georgia;">id.<i>, at 337. Strict scru</i></span><span style="color: black; font-family: &quot;Century Schoolbook&quot;;"><i>­</i></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Georgia;"><i>tiny requires the university to
demonstrate with clarity that its “purpose or interest is both constitutionally
permissible and substantial, and that its use of the classification is
necessary … to the accomplishment of its purpose.” </i></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Georgia;">Bakke<i>, 438 U. S., at 305 (opinion of
Powell, J.) (internal quotation marks omitted).</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i><a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pdf/11-345_l5gm.pdf">Id.</a></i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"> at 7-8.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">In other words, a public university
seeking to employ a race-sensitive admissions policy must first demonstrate
that it has a legitimate reason to do so (<i>i.e.</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">, that its student body lacks diversity, and that
the lack of diversity adversely affects its students); <i>and</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"> <i>then </i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">demonstrate
that the method employed to remedy that problem is narrowly tailored to
accomplish that goal. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">As to the first part of that test, the
Court said, “<span style="color: black;">a university’s ‘educational judg</span></span><span style="color: black;">­</span><span style="color: black; font-family: Georgia;">ment
that such diversity is essential to its educational mission is one to which we
defer’,” but a reviewing court nonetheless “should ensure that there is a
reasoned, principled explanation for the academic deci</span><span style="color: black;">­</span><span style="color: black; font-family: Georgia;">sion.”
<i><a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pdf/11-345_l5gm.pdf">Fisher</a></i></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Georgia;">, slip op. at 9, quoting <i>Grutter</i></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Georgia;">, <i>supra</i></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Georgia;">, 539 U. S.<i> </i></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Georgia;">at 328. As to the second part of the
test – <i>i.e.</i></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Georgia;">, that
the methods employed to reach the goal of student body diversity are narrowly
tailored to that goal – the Court held that no such deference should be
afforded the University, and therein lies the problem: The courts below had
deferred to the University’s judgment as to <i>both</i></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Georgia;"> the need for diversity <i>and</i></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Georgia;"> the method used to accomplish it. <i><a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pdf/11-345_l5gm.pdf">Id<span style="font-style: normal;">.</span></a></i></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Georgia;"> at 11.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="color: black; font-family: Georgia;">This is where the matter
gets really complicated. Under the Court’s “strict scrutiny” analysis, “it
remains at all times the University’s obligation to demon</span><span style="color: black;">­</span><span style="color: black; font-family: Georgia;">strate
… that admissions processes ‘ensure that each applicant is evalu</span><span style="color: black;">­</span><span style="color: black; font-family: Georgia;">ated
as an individual and not in a way that makes an applicant’s race or ethnicity
the defining feature of his or her application.’” <i><a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pdf/11-345_l5gm.pdf">Fisher</a></i></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Georgia;">, slip op. at 10, quoting <i>Grutter</i></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Georgia;">, <i>supra</i></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Georgia;">, 539 U.S. at 337. Furthermore, it’s
not enough to demonstrate that using race in the admission process would, on
its own, enhance diversity. Instead, the University must demonstrate that it
considered race-neutral methods of achieving diversity, but that those methods
would be ineffective. “If a nonracial approach … could promote the substantial
interest about as well and at tolerable administrative expense,” the Court
held, “then the university may not consider race.”<i> <a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pdf/11-345_l5gm.pdf">Id.</a></i></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Georgia;"> at 10 (citations and internal
quotation marks omitted).<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">In any event, the Court remanded the
case back to the Court of Appeals so that the “<span style="color: black;">admissions
process can be considered and judged under a correct analysis.” <i><a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pdf/11-345_l5gm.pdf">Fisher</a></i></span><span style="color: black;">, slip op. at 13. The “correct analysis,” though is so
convoluted it’s a wonder any university – or any court – can make sense of it.
In practice, I suspect that judges who are inclined to uphold affirmative
action will do so whenever a university can demonstrate that it’s ticked all
the right boxes, while judges who are disinclined will always be able to find
fault with a university’s justification for its affirmative action policy.</span><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<!--EndFragment-->Davehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08981424431669076836noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486376351439141348.post-35352567562210153752013-06-24T22:29:00.000-05:002013-06-24T22:29:36.903-05:00So, There Was A Hockey Game On TV Tonight …<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-F-4eXlYfQbg/UckNk6VL7jI/AAAAAAAACEE/tJxnobDUvpI/s1600/Chicago+Tribune+Headline+.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="160" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-F-4eXlYfQbg/UckNk6VL7jI/AAAAAAAACEE/tJxnobDUvpI/s400/Chicago+Tribune+Headline+.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">Un. Freaking. Believable. Blackhawks score two goals in 17 seconds to win the Stanley Cup.</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><br /></span>
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">Take it away, Chicago Symphony Orchestra:</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><br /></span>
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><br /></span>
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="236" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/u-LQ8B7Zd0U" width="420"></iframe>Davehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08981424431669076836noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486376351439141348.post-34527466187340589782013-06-21T21:52:00.000-05:002013-06-21T21:52:56.473-05:00Quick Thoughts On The Criminal Complaint Against Edward Snowden<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-eI_RQJEtEjU/UcURJMzgrtI/AAAAAAAACD0/AXv_mrk53NE/s1600/Snowden.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="231" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-eI_RQJEtEjU/UcURJMzgrtI/AAAAAAAACD0/AXv_mrk53NE/s400/Snowden.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:DocumentProperties>
<o:Template>Normal</o:Template>
<o:Revision>0</o:Revision>
<o:TotalTime>0</o:TotalTime>
<o:Pages>1</o:Pages>
<o:Words>425</o:Words>
<o:Characters>2426</o:Characters>
<o:Company>Law Office of David P. von Ebers</o:Company>
<o:Lines>20</o:Lines>
<o:Paragraphs>4</o:Paragraphs>
<o:CharactersWithSpaces>2979</o:CharactersWithSpaces>
<o:Version>11.1539</o:Version>
</o:DocumentProperties>
<o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
<o:AllowPNG/>
</o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:DoNotShowRevisions/>
<w:DoNotPrintRevisions/>
<w:DisplayHorizontalDrawingGridEvery>0</w:DisplayHorizontalDrawingGridEvery>
<w:DisplayVerticalDrawingGridEvery>0</w:DisplayVerticalDrawingGridEvery>
<w:UseMarginsForDrawingGridOrigin/>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]-->
<!--StartFragment-->
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="color: #333333; font-family: Georgia;">I’m really confused by
some of the reactions I’ve seen to <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/us-charges-snowden-with-espionage/2013/06/21/507497d8-dab1-11e2-a016-92547bf094cc_story.html">the
charges filed against Edward Snowden</a>. He disclosed information the
government contends he was not authorized to disclose, and he did it in an
overt, very public fashion. Do we really expect the government to say, “That’s
cool, bro, you meant well”? <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="color: #333333; font-family: Georgia;">I’m not saying he’s
guilty; I’m not saying he doesn’t have defenses; and I’m certainly not saying
he should be punished harshly. I’m saying, how can you seriously argue the
government should just do nothing in the face of conduct that appears to be
illegal? Or, maybe the better question is this: If the government is supposed
to just ignore Snowden’s potentially illegal conduct, how do you suggest the
government should decide when to prosecute and when not to prosecute people who
disclose classified information? Yes, prosecutors have discretion; but how do
you propose they exercise that discretion? Based on political considerations?
These aren’t easy questions, but you have to answer them before you bash the
Obama Administration for making the decision to prosecute.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="color: #333333; font-family: Georgia;">Interestingly enough,
even Snowden’s greatest booster, Glenn Greenwald, acknowledges that some
charges are probably appropriate. Greenwald’s objection is that the
Administration <a href="http://www.mediaite.com/tv/greenwald-slams-snowden-espionage-charges-extreme-excess-vindictive-mentality-from-obama-admin/">“overcharged”
Snowden</a>: <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in; mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; text-align: justify; text-autospace: none;">
<span style="color: #333333; font-family: Georgia;"><i>[On
MSNBC] </i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>Greenwald noted that
Snowden didn’t work for a foreign government, he didn’t provide information
directly to America’s enemies, and he didn’t sell any top-secret information,
so the espionage charge seems extreme to him. However, he was not surprised
that the Obama administration has used the Espionage Act for the seventh time
to go after a government whistleblower.<o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>[Chris]
Hayes acknowledged that the act is “pretty terrible,” but asked Greenwald that
even if you believe there was an enormous net benefit to what Snowden released,
why there shouldn’t be some official “recriminations” for people who violate
the “basic norms of the institution.” Greenwald made it clear there is
absolutely no one who believes that Snowden shouldn’t be charged, because even
Snowden himself admits he violated the law and expected to be charged with
something.</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">At this point, <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/us-charges-snowden-with-espionage/2013/06/21/507497d8-dab1-11e2-a016-92547bf094cc_story.html">according
to the <i>Washington Post</i></a>, the criminal complaint against Snowden is
under seal. Until the specific details are released, I’ll reserve judgment on
Greenwald’s “overcharging” argument. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">But as to the argument that the
government should simply have done nothing? I fail to see how that makes any
sense.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<!--EndFragment-->Davehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08981424431669076836noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486376351439141348.post-8307986374182333432013-06-21T17:10:00.000-05:002013-06-21T17:10:04.994-05:00Your Friday Clash Song: Is The Music Calling For A River Of Blood?<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/MiBUEeEfHrc" width="420"></iframe><br />
<br />
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:DocumentProperties>
<o:Template>Normal</o:Template>
<o:Revision>0</o:Revision>
<o:TotalTime>0</o:TotalTime>
<o:Pages>1</o:Pages>
<o:Words>314</o:Words>
<o:Characters>1794</o:Characters>
<o:Company>Law Office of David P. von Ebers</o:Company>
<o:Lines>14</o:Lines>
<o:Paragraphs>3</o:Paragraphs>
<o:CharactersWithSpaces>2203</o:CharactersWithSpaces>
<o:Version>11.1539</o:Version>
</o:DocumentProperties>
<o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
<o:AllowPNG/>
</o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:DoNotShowRevisions/>
<w:DoNotPrintRevisions/>
<w:DisplayHorizontalDrawingGridEvery>0</w:DisplayHorizontalDrawingGridEvery>
<w:DisplayVerticalDrawingGridEvery>0</w:DisplayVerticalDrawingGridEvery>
<w:UseMarginsForDrawingGridOrigin/>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]-->
<!--StartFragment-->
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><a href="http://www.joestrummer.org/the-clash/sandinista/corner-soul.php">“Corner
Soul,”</a> recorded live during the Bonds International Casino shows in New
York City in 1981. The original is on <i><a href="http://www.joestrummer.org/the-clash/sandinista.php">Sandinista!</a></i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"> (1980), the penultimate studio album made by the
“real” Clash – i.e., the Stummer-Jones Clash, not to be confused with the Mick
Jones-less Clash that put out <i><a href="http://www.joestrummer.org/the-clash/cut-the-crap.php">Cut The Crap</a></i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"> in 1985.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; text-align: justify; text-autospace: none;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">A college friend who was a huge Clash fan observed,
after buying <i>Sandinista!</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"> and
listening to it a few times, that it would have made a great double-album. It
was, of course, a triple-album (on vinyl, which was the only game in town back
then), and so his point, I suppose, was that the band should have done a little more
culling during the production process. If my memory is correct, that about sums
up the critical reaction to <i>Sandinista!</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">, too, although <i><a href="http://www.rollingstone.com/music/albumreviews/sandinista-19810305">Rolling
Stone<span style="font-style: normal;"> gave it five stars</span></a></i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"> and <a href="http://www.theclash.com/music/albums/sandinista">the <i>Village Voice</i><span style="font-style: normal;"> named it “Album of the Year”</span></a> in 1981. But
even John Piccarella’s glowing <i>Rolling Stone</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"> review <a href="http://www.rollingstone.com/music/albumreviews/sandinista-19810305">says
that the album is</a> “about two-thirds real,” after “[e]liminating the
instrumentals, dub versions, two-minute novelties and run-on chants” on the
three-record set. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; text-align: justify; text-autospace: none;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">I don’t know. Maybe it’s the passage of years since
its release – nostalgia’ll do funny things to you – or maybe it’s just my
willingness to indulge the band’s mythology, but I love the quirkiness of <i>Sandinista!</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"> and all its hidden gems. Like today’s selection,
“Corner Soul,” which evokes horrid memories of the Reagan/Thatcher-era’s
bloody foreign policy:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in; mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; text-autospace: none;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i><a href="http://www.joestrummer.org/the-clash/sandinista/corner-soul.php">Is the
music of grove skin rock</a><o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in; mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; text-autospace: none;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>Soaked in the
diesel of war boys war?<o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in; mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; text-autospace: none;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>Blood, black
gold and the face of a judge<o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>Is the music calling for a river of blood?</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">Anyway, here’s the original studio
version:</span></div>
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/7H8nr8J-WF4" width="420"></iframe><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia; line-height: 32px;">&nbsp;</span>
<!--EndFragment--><br />
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:DocumentProperties>
<o:Template>Normal</o:Template>
<o:Revision>0</o:Revision>
<o:TotalTime>0</o:TotalTime>
<o:Pages>1</o:Pages>
<o:Words>10</o:Words>
<o:Characters>57</o:Characters>
<o:Company>Law Office of David P. von Ebers</o:Company>
<o:Lines>1</o:Lines>
<o:Paragraphs>1</o:Paragraphs>
<o:CharactersWithSpaces>70</o:CharactersWithSpaces>
<o:Version>11.1539</o:Version>
</o:DocumentProperties>
<o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
<o:AllowPNG/>
</o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:DoNotShowRevisions/>
<w:DoNotPrintRevisions/>
<w:DisplayHorizontalDrawingGridEvery>0</w:DisplayHorizontalDrawingGridEvery>
<w:DisplayVerticalDrawingGridEvery>0</w:DisplayVerticalDrawingGridEvery>
<w:UseMarginsForDrawingGridOrigin/>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]-->
<!--StartFragment-->
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">Yeah, that’s pretty great.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">Now, you know what to do.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>Turn. It. Up.<o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<!--EndFragment-->Davehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08981424431669076836noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486376351439141348.post-8078555860645496892013-06-20T22:01:00.000-05:002013-06-20T22:01:25.153-05:00From One Youngest-Of-Eleven To Another …<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="288" mozallowfullscreen="" scrolling="no" src="http://www.hulu.com/embed.html?eid=nbnquzi4ugidgtesldhnra" webkitallowfullscreen="" width="420"></iframe><br />
<br />
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:DocumentProperties>
<o:Template>Normal</o:Template>
<o:Revision>0</o:Revision>
<o:TotalTime>0</o:TotalTime>
<o:Pages>1</o:Pages>
<o:Words>476</o:Words>
<o:Characters>2716</o:Characters>
<o:Company>Law Office of David P. von Ebers</o:Company>
<o:Lines>22</o:Lines>
<o:Paragraphs>5</o:Paragraphs>
<o:CharactersWithSpaces>3335</o:CharactersWithSpaces>
<o:Version>11.1539</o:Version>
</o:DocumentProperties>
<o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
<o:AllowPNG/>
</o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:DoNotShowRevisions/>
<w:DoNotPrintRevisions/>
<w:DisplayHorizontalDrawingGridEvery>0</w:DisplayHorizontalDrawingGridEvery>
<w:DisplayVerticalDrawingGridEvery>0</w:DisplayVerticalDrawingGridEvery>
<w:UseMarginsForDrawingGridOrigin/>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]-->
<!--StartFragment-->
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">Sometimes I think Stephen Colbert and I
lead parallel lives. Except for the part about him being rich and successful
and funny and well liked and productive and insightful and a few years younger
than me …<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">But, anyway, like Colbert, I’m the
youngest of 11, and I, too, was raised Catholic. So, there’s that.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">And we have another thing in common. We
both had mothers born in the 1920s – his in 1920, mine in 1924. Also, we both
lost our mothers when we were in our 40s. My mother died in November 2010, when
I was 48. <a href="http://jezebel.com/your-morning-cry-stephen-colberts-tearful-tribute-to-514552221">Mr.
Colbert’s mother passed away last week</a>. He is 49. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">Sadly, Stephen Colbert and I have
another unfortunate thing in common: We both had siblings who predeceased our
mothers, which means we both had to watch our mothers bury them.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">Let me tell you something. There is
nothing in this world sadder than watching your mother iron a shirt for her son
to be buried in. There’s no memory you can have that’ll sear itself into your
brain like that. Nothing.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">But watching Stephen Colbert’s touching
on-air tribute to his mother, Lorna Colbert, I’m reminded even more so about
how amazing women like that were – women born in the aftermath of World War I;
who came of age in the Great Depression; who sent the people they loved off to
World War II and hoped to whatever god there may be that those people would
return, more or less whole; and who were given so little by their own country,
but still held such remarkable faith in it. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">My mother did all those things, then
raised 11 children, went back to finish her college education (graduating with
my oldest sister), and embarked on a career as a middle school teacher when I
was old enough to get to and from school with the aid of older siblings and
other kids in the neighborhood. Oh, and in the meantime, she and my dad found
the time to work on integrating our local public schools and to fight for open
housing in our little suburb on Chicago’s west side. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">More than any of that, though,
Colbert’s beautiful eulogy reminded me that the most important details of my
mother’s life, or of any parent’s life, are the mundane ones, the day-to-day
kindnesses; the hilarious (and intentional) malapropisms she was famous for;
the stories she told (over and over again) about growing up in Waukegan,
Illinois, the home town of Jack Benny and Ray Bradbury … and the gentle, and
sometimes not so gentle, way she’d correct us when we went off the rails. My
mother was kind of a badass, given all that she did in her life; but I miss the
ordinary things like having a cup of coffee with her and talking about nothing,
and everything, the way you do when you’re old enough to sit with your mother
and have a cup of coffee.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">When my brother John passed away in
1991, my mother laid her hand on his casket and said, “When you bring a child
into this world, you’re all alone” – that was true in her era; fathers and
family members generally weren’t allowed in the delivery room – “but when you
bury a child, at least you have your family around you.” So, too, when you bury
your mother.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">Anyway, what I really wanted to say
was, thank you, Mr. Colbert, for bringing all that back to me. From one
youngest-of-eleven to another, I wish you peace.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<!--EndFragment-->Davehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08981424431669076836noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486376351439141348.post-15612850114905883232013-06-18T21:26:00.001-05:002013-06-18T21:26:58.855-05:00No, Edward Snowden Has Not Committed Treason<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-OWKnCu5ePUk/UcEWTxMYXeI/AAAAAAAACDk/lawa0gaGllU/s1600/Snowden.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="231" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-OWKnCu5ePUk/UcEWTxMYXeI/AAAAAAAACDk/lawa0gaGllU/s400/Snowden.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:DocumentProperties>
<o:Template>Normal</o:Template>
<o:Revision>0</o:Revision>
<o:TotalTime>0</o:TotalTime>
<o:Pages>1</o:Pages>
<o:Words>1056</o:Words>
<o:Characters>6024</o:Characters>
<o:Company>Law Office of David P. von Ebers</o:Company>
<o:Lines>50</o:Lines>
<o:Paragraphs>12</o:Paragraphs>
<o:CharactersWithSpaces>7397</o:CharactersWithSpaces>
<o:Version>11.1539</o:Version>
</o:DocumentProperties>
<o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
<o:AllowPNG/>
</o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:DoNotShowRevisions/>
<w:DoNotPrintRevisions/>
<w:DisplayHorizontalDrawingGridEvery>0</w:DisplayHorizontalDrawingGridEvery>
<w:DisplayVerticalDrawingGridEvery>0</w:DisplayVerticalDrawingGridEvery>
<w:UseMarginsForDrawingGridOrigin/>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]-->
<!--StartFragment-->
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">Here’s the thing about the Edward
Snowden/NSA/PRISM story: There is a story there, and it’s an important one.
Although we don’t know the precise details yet, the story clearly involves a
government that’s spying on its own citizens, and none of us should be too
comfortable with that. Unfortunately, though, as the facts come out, it appears
more and more that it’s <i>not</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"> the
story Snowden and his primary cheerleader, Glenn Greenwald, want to tell.
They’ve gotten a lot of the details wrong, and they’ve provided scant evidence
of Snowden’s most outrageous accusations. Consequently, what should be an
important story about what our government is doing <i>to us</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">, <i>without our consent</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">, has become a story about personalities –
Greenwald’s, Snowden’s, and Pres. Obama’s – rather than the impetus to a much
needed conversation. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">Chez Pazienza has <a href="http://thedailybanter.com/2013/06/greenwald-snowden-and-the-art-of-hero-worship/">an
excellent piece at <i>The Daily Banter</i></a> about the extent to which the
whole discussion has been sidetracked by hero-worship, specifically targeting
Greenwald’s slipshod reporting and those on the left who won’t brook any
criticism of Greenwald or Snowden:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>For
many on the left, Snowden’s tale was unequivocally true and undoubtedly the
stuff of paranoid nightmares long before it was even reported. Greenwald’s
stories and Snowden’s nebulous accusations and behavior only confirmed that
which the left already knew and had been railing about for years without direct
proof of their suspicions. Any attempt to refute either, in the eyes of many
far-left liberals, now amounts to little more than pro-surveillance state
fealty to authority, regardless of how backed up by facts it happens to be.<o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<a name='more'></a><span style="font-family: Georgia;">And he’s right. But as much as this has
become a story about hero-worship, it’s also about (as Pazienza implicitly
notes) the vilification of anyone who disagrees with your particular point of
view. Greenwald and his acolytes are experts in this endeavor, cheerfully
referring to the Obama Administration as <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jun/10/edward-snowden-united-stasi-america">the
modern-day <i>Stasi</i></a> (that coming from Daniel Ellsberg, <a href="http://davescornertavern.blogspot.com/2011/01/you-know-what-barack-obama-didnt-do-mr.html">a
guy who helped lie us into the Vietnam War</a>, by the way). On the other hand,
Snowden’s critics have been quick to label him a “traitor” and accuse him of
“treason,” and that’s equally hyperbolic and equally distracts from the
conversation we should be having about the surveillance state.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">So, allow me to clear the air: Whatever
else you might think of Snowden, he has not committed treason. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">Treason is the only crime that’s
specifically defined in the United States Constitution. <a href="http://constitution.findlaw.com/article3/article.html">Article I, Section
3</a> states:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>Treason
against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or
in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be
convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt
Act, or on Confession in open Court.<o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">That definition is incorporated into
Section 2831 of the federal Criminal Code, <a href="http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2381">18 U.S.C. § 2831</a>,
which additionally provides that anyone convicted of treason “shall suffer
death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined … not less
than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United
States.”<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">The framers of our Constitution had
good reason to set out a precise definition of treason in the Constitution
itself; to prevent Congress from altering that definition; and to ensure that
cases involving treason were subject to strict procedural and evidentiary
rules. As the Supreme Court explained in <i><a href="http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/325/1/case.html">Cramer v.
United States</a></i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">, 325 U.S. 1 (1945),
many, if not most, of the men who drafted the Constitution had been directly
involved in the Revolution, and had therefore been guilty of treason as it was
then defined under English law. More to the point, the framers knew that
accusations of treason were used to silence critics of the English crown, to
punish dissent, and to deter legitimate political protest. And so, as necessary
as it was to punish actual treason against the new republic, the drafters of
our Constitution sought to eliminate those abuses by tightly controlling when
and under what circumstances a case for treason would lie.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">And so the Court held:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>[T]he
crime of treason consists of two elements: adherence to the enemy and rendering
him aid and comfort. A citizen intellectually or emotionally may favor the
enemy and harbor sympathies or convictions disloyal to this country’s policy or
interest, but, so long as he commits no act of aid and comfort to the enemy,
there is no treason. On the other hand, a citizen may take actions which do aid
and comfort the enemy – making a speech critical of the government or opposing
its measures, profiteering, striking in defense plants or essential work, and
the hundred other things which impair our cohesion and diminish our strength –
but if there is no adherence to the enemy in this, if there is no intent to
betray, there is no treason.<o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i><a href="http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/325/1/case.html">Cramer</a></i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">, 325 U.S. at 29.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">Moreover, with respect to the interplay
between the intent element and the requirement of an “overt act” committed in
furtherance of treason, the Court emphasized: “to make treason, the defendant
not only must intend the act, but he must intend to betray his country by means
of the act.” <i>Id.</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"> at 31.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">Here, Snowden has done something (<i>i.e.</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">, released confidential information regarding NSA
surveillance programs) that could, theoretically, provide some assistance to
the ultimate objects of that surveillance – terrorist groups like al Qaeda with
whom we are at “war.” But it seems pretty clear to me that he lacked the
requisite intent to make his actions amount to treason. He doesn’t “adhere to
the enemy” as that phrase is used in treason cases; he didn’t intend to benefit
terrorist organizations or “betray” the United States by releasing that
information. To the contrary, even if you think he’s a complete idiot, it seems
pretty clear that his intention was to benefit the American public by notifying
us (however inaccurately) about surveillance programs that, <a href="http://thisweekinblackness.com/2013/06/12/nsa-fisa-president-obama/">according
to the ACLU</a>, exceed the government’s legal authority.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">That may be heroic, or that may be
reckless. But it’s not treason as that word is defined in our country.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">All of this may seem pedantic, but
vilifying political opponents – whether it’s Ellsberg’s use of <i>“Stasi”</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"> to describe the current Administration (which is
not unlike the Tea Party’s use of “Nazi” or “Marxist”), or the President’s
defenders calling Snowden a “traitor” and accusing him of “treason” – serves
only one purpose: To silence people with whom you disagree. And in a time when
we should be having a frank, open conversation in which we consider <i>all</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"> sides of the debate, silencing people is the last
thing we should do.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<!--EndFragment-->Davehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08981424431669076836noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486376351439141348.post-32297789014577447132013-06-17T22:33:00.000-05:002013-06-17T22:33:28.327-05:00SCOTUS On Arizona’s Voting Law: Not The Victory You Were Looking For<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-OeBwzGVSGgw/Ub_USDP3QOI/AAAAAAAACDU/fPw_hkRTyWg/s1600/Supreme+Court+Equal+Justice+Under+Law.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="193" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-OeBwzGVSGgw/Ub_USDP3QOI/AAAAAAAACDU/fPw_hkRTyWg/s400/Supreme+Court+Equal+Justice+Under+Law.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:DocumentProperties>
<o:Template>Normal</o:Template>
<o:Revision>0</o:Revision>
<o:TotalTime>0</o:TotalTime>
<o:Pages>1</o:Pages>
<o:Words>1202</o:Words>
<o:Characters>6853</o:Characters>
<o:Company>Law Office of David P. von Ebers</o:Company>
<o:Lines>57</o:Lines>
<o:Paragraphs>13</o:Paragraphs>
<o:CharactersWithSpaces>8415</o:CharactersWithSpaces>
<o:Version>11.1539</o:Version>
</o:DocumentProperties>
<o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
<o:AllowPNG/>
</o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:DoNotShowRevisions/>
<w:DoNotPrintRevisions/>
<w:DisplayHorizontalDrawingGridEvery>0</w:DisplayHorizontalDrawingGridEvery>
<w:DisplayVerticalDrawingGridEvery>0</w:DisplayVerticalDrawingGridEvery>
<w:UseMarginsForDrawingGridOrigin/>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]-->
<!--StartFragment-->
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">On Monday, the Supreme Court announced
its decision in <i><a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pdf/12-71_7l48.pdf">Arizona v.
Inter Tribal Council of Arizona, Inc.</a></i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">, No. 12-17 (.pdf file), to applause on the left. The Court’s
decision, penned by Justice Scalia, struck down a provision of Arizona law
requiring individuals registering to vote in federal elections to provide proof
of U.S. citizenship in certain cases. But, alas, it’s not quite what it seems.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">The case stems from Arizona’s
Proposition 200, adopted in 2004, which “<span style="color: black;">amended the
State’s election code to require county recorders to ‘reject any application for
registration that is not accompanied by satisfactory evidence of United States
citizenship.’ Ariz. Rev. Stat. Ann. §16–166(F) (West Supp. 2012).” <i><a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pdf/12-71_7l48.pdf">Inter Tribal
Council</a></i></span><span style="color: black;">, slip op. at 2-3. Thereafter,
individuals registering to vote were required to submit documentation such as
birth certificates, driver’s licenses (if the issuing state required proof of
citizenship), naturalization papers, and so forth. The issue in the <i>Inter
Tribal Council</i></span><span style="color: black;"> case, however, was a narrow
one: not whether Arizona’s proof-of-citizenship requirement was invalid or
unconstitutional in and of itself, but whether it conflicted with federal law
with regard to mail-in registrations for federal elections.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<a name='more'></a><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="color: black; font-family: Georgia;">As the Court explained,
under the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 (“NVRA”), 42 U.S.C. §§ 1973gg
<i>et seq</i></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Georgia;">., states
must allow individuals to register to vote in federal elections at the time
they obtain driver’s licenses, in person, or through the mail. With regard to
registrations by mail, NVRA Section 1973gg-4 “requires States to ‘ac</span><span style="color: black;">­</span><span style="color: black; font-family: Georgia;">cept
and use’ a standard federal registration form,” slip op. at 2, which is
prepared by the Election Assistance Commission (“EAC”). So, the EAC prepared a
form that requires registrants swear, under oath, that they are U.S. citizens,
but does not require further proof of citizenship. After Proposition 200,
however, Arizona directed its election officials to reject any federal form
submitted by a mail-in registrant unless it was accompanied by the citizenship
documents required by Arizona law.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="color: black; font-family: Georgia;">So, the question in the <i>Inter
Tribal Council</i></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Georgia;"> case
was whether NVRA Section 1973gg-4, which directs states to “accept and use” the
federal form, prohibited Arizona from requiring additional documentation with
regard to citizenship. The starting point for the Court’s analysis was the
Elections Clause of the federal Constitution, which provides, in relevant part,
“</span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">The Times, Places and Manner of
holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each
State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make
or alter such Regulations.” <a href="http://constitution.findlaw.com/article1/article.html">U.S. Const., Art.
I, § 4</a>. So, in essence, the states are required to set up procedures for
holding federal elections, but, if they fail to do so, or if Congress otherwise
chooses, Congress can enact its own laws modifying or supplanting state
procedures.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">Here, both Arizona and Congress weighed
in on the requirements for registering to vote in federal regulations by mail,
Arizona by requiring mail-in registrants to supply citizenship documents <i>not
required</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"> by the NVRA. In Court,
Arizona argued that it wasn’t violating the NVRA’s mandate <span style="color: black;">to “accept and use” the federal registration form, because
the State <i>was</i></span><span style="color: black;"> accepting and using it,
but was merely requiring additional documentary proof of citizenship. <o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="color: black; font-family: Georgia;">Not so, said the Supreme
Court, citing a number of other federal statutes using similar “accept and use”
language, all of which have been held to be mandatory – that is, the
requirement to accept and use meant not just “willing receipt” of whatever the
statute commands, but that “its object is to be accepted <i>as suffi</i></span><span style="color: black;"><i>­</i></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Georgia;"><i>cient
</i></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Georgia;">for the requirement it
is meant to satisfy.” <i><a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pdf/12-71_7l48.pdf">Inter Tribal
Council</a></i></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Georgia;">, slip op.
at 7-8 (emphasis in original). The Court further stated that Arizona’s position
was inconsistent with NVRA Section 1973gg–6(a)(1)(B), which “provides that a
State shall ‘ensure that any eligible applicant is registered to vote in an
election . . . if the <i>valid voter registration form</i></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Georgia;"> of the applicant is post</span><span style="color: black;">­</span><span style="color: black; font-family: Georgia;">marked’
not later than a specified number of days before the election. (Emphasis
added.).” <i>Id.</i></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Georgia;"> at
8-9. Obviously, the federal form prepared by the EAC is a “valid voter
registration form” within the meaning of this section.<b><o:p></o:p></b></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">So, the Court ruled that NVRA Section
1973gg-4 did not permit Arizona to reject duly submitted federal registration
forms simply because the registrants failed to include additional citizenship
documents required by state law. The Court then quickly dispatched Arizona’s
additional argument that NVRA Section 1973gg-4 was not meant to preempt Arizona
law, stating that federal legislation passed under the Constitution’s Election
Clause, “‘<span style="color: black;">so far as it extends and conflicts with the
regulations of the State, necessarily supersedes them’,” quoting <i>Ex parte
Siebold</i></span><span style="color: black;">, 100 U. S. 371, 384 (1880). <i><a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pdf/12-71_7l48.pdf">Inter Tribal
Council</a></i></span><span style="color: black;">, slip op. at 10-11.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="color: black; font-family: Georgia;">But, hold on. That’s not
the end of the matter. Noting that the Elections Clause only gives Congress the
power to override state law with respect to “[t]he Times, Places and Manner of
holding Elections,” the Court pointed out that it’s the states that get to
determine <i>who</i></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Georgia;"> gets
to vote (subject, of course, to the <a href="http://constitution.findlaw.com/amendment15/amendment.html">Fifteenth</a>,
<a href="http://constitution.findlaw.com/amendment19/amendment.html">Nineteenth</a>
and <a href="http://constitution.findlaw.com/amendment26/amendment.html">Twenty-Sixth</a>
Amendments). Specifically, <a href="http://constitution.findlaw.com/article1/article.html">Article I, Section
2</a> of the Constitution states that, with respect to the House of
Representatives, “</span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">the Electors in each
State shall have the Qualifications requisite for Electors of the most numerous
Branch of the State Legislature”; and the </span><span style="color: #3c3c3c; font-family: LucidaGrande;"><a href="http://constitution.findlaw.com/amendment17/amendment.html"><span style="font-family: Georgia;">Seventeenth Amendment</span></a></span><span style="color: #3c3c3c; font-family: Georgia;"> </span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">tracks that language with respect to direct elections of Senators. <i><a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pdf/12-71_7l48.pdf">Inter Tribal
Council</a></i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">, slip op. at 13. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">Furthermore, NVRA <span style="color: black;">Section 1973gg–7(b)(1) says that the EAC’s federal
registration form must require “such identifying infor</span></span><span style="color: black;">­</span><span style="color: black; font-family: Georgia;">mation
… and other information … as is necessary to enable the appropriate State
election official to assess the eligibil</span><span style="color: black;">­</span><span style="color: black; font-family: Georgia;">ity of the applicant ….” Meaning that
Arizona has the right to ask the EAC to alter its form to require Arizona’s
mail-in registrants to submit additional proof of citizenship as required by
state law. In fact, Arizona tried that back in 2005, but the EAC was evenly
split on the issue (two to two), and so it could not honor the state’s request.
And here’s the kicker. Said Justice Scalia:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: justify;">
<span style="color: black; font-family: Georgia;"><i>[W]e are aware of nothing that prevents Arizona from renewing
its request.<span style="mso-text-raise: 3.0pt;"><sup> </sup></span>Should the
EAC’s inaction persist, Arizona would have the opportunity to establish in a
reviewing court that a mere oath will not suffice to effectuate its citizenship
requirement and that the EAC is therefore under a nondiscretionary duty to
include Ari</i></span><span style="color: black;"><i>­</i></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Georgia;"><i>zona’s concrete evidence requirement
on the Federal Form. See 5 U. S. C. §706(1).<o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i><a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pdf/12-71_7l48.pdf">Inter Tribal
Council</a></i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">, slip op. at 17.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">Well. That was helpful. <i>For Arizona</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">In any event, let’s recap. The Court’s
ruling applies only to mail-in registrations for federal elections, not to all
voter registrations. The Court did not find anything inherently wrong or
unconstitutional with the state’s requiring additional proof of citizenship,
only that it conflicted with federal law. And the Court provided Arizona a
handy roadmap to challenge the EAC’s decision not to modify the federal mail-in
form to require additional citizenship documents from Arizona registrants.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">So, all in all, it’s not quite the
victory for voting rights that many were hoping for.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<!--EndFragment-->Davehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08981424431669076836noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486376351439141348.post-89558217866798830942013-06-14T15:44:00.001-05:002013-06-14T15:44:41.149-05:00Your Friday Clash Song: Nembutol Numbs It All …<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/sTVkxXv5qnU" width="420"></iframe><br />
<br />
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:DocumentProperties>
<o:Author>D.C. District &amp; Bankruptcy</o:Author>
<o:Template>Normal</o:Template>
<o:Revision>0</o:Revision>
<o:TotalTime>0</o:TotalTime>
<o:Pages>1</o:Pages>
<o:Words>281</o:Words>
<o:Characters>1602</o:Characters>
<o:Company>Law Office of David P. von Ebers</o:Company>
<o:Lines>13</o:Lines>
<o:Paragraphs>3</o:Paragraphs>
<o:CharactersWithSpaces>1967</o:CharactersWithSpaces>
<o:Version>11.1539</o:Version>
</o:DocumentProperties>
<o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
<o:AllowPNG/>
</o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:DoNotShowRevisions/>
<w:DoNotPrintRevisions/>
<w:DisplayHorizontalDrawingGridEvery>0</w:DisplayHorizontalDrawingGridEvery>
<w:DisplayVerticalDrawingGridEvery>0</w:DisplayVerticalDrawingGridEvery>
<w:UseMarginsForDrawingGridOrigin/>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]-->
<!--StartFragment-->
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>… But I prefer alcohol!</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><a href="http://clash.wikia.com/wiki/The_Right_Profile">“The Right Profile”</a>
from <i><a href="http://clash.wikia.com/wiki/London_Calling_(album)">London
Calling</a></i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"> (1979), a tribute to
the great closeted actor <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montgomery_Clift">Montgomery
Clift</a>, who died in 1966. <a href="http://clash.wikia.com/wiki/The_Right_Profile">According to the <i>Clash
Wiki</i></a>:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>Johnny
Green (Clash tour manager): “At Wessex, Guy [Stevens, producer] fished this
book out of his bag, it was Patricia Bosworth’s Montgomery Clift biography. He
was telling Joe ‘If you’re going to write a song about somebody, write one
about Montgomery Clift!’”<o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><a href="http://movies.nytimes.com/person/13682/Montgomery-Clift/biography">The <i>New
York Times</i><span style="font-style: normal;">’ biography of Clift</span></a>
cites this description <a href="http://www.allmovie.com/artist/montgomery-clift-p13682">from <i>All Movie
Guide</i></a>, which could just as easily apply to Joe Strummer, or any member
of the Clash, really: “Prodigiously talented, intense, and defiantly
non-conformist, he refused to play by the usual rules of celebrity, actively
shunning the spotlight and working solely according to his own whims and
desires.” <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001050/bio"><i>IMDb</i><span style="font-style: normal;"> notes</span></a> that Clift’s “father was a violent,
abusive, ultra-conservative bigot,” and that “whenever Clift was playing
characters snapping as they went up against ignorance or brutality, Clift was
said to have acted with his father in mind as an antagonist” – which also makes
him an apt subject for the Clash. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">Moreover, the band’s <a href="http://clash.wikia.com/wiki/Live:_From_Here_to_Eternity">1999 live
collection</a> takes its name from a Montgomery Clift film, <i><a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0045793/">From Here To Eternity</a></i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">. So, there you go. It all comes full circle, or
something.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">Anyway, it’s a great damn song. So …<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>Turn. It. Up.</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<!--EndFragment-->Davehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08981424431669076836noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486376351439141348.post-48959758739465593022013-06-14T11:57:00.000-05:002013-06-14T11:57:17.929-05:00The Supreme Court To America: Don’t Protest Me, Bro!<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Lpww8iefH9U/UbtK5KVTe0I/AAAAAAAACDE/JPUYKCokE30/s1600/Supreme+Court+Protest.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="170" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Lpww8iefH9U/UbtK5KVTe0I/AAAAAAAACDE/JPUYKCokE30/s400/Supreme+Court+Protest.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:DocumentProperties>
<o:Author>D.C. District &amp; Bankruptcy</o:Author>
<o:Template>Normal</o:Template>
<o:Revision>0</o:Revision>
<o:TotalTime>0</o:TotalTime>
<o:Pages>1</o:Pages>
<o:Words>1108</o:Words>
<o:Characters>6317</o:Characters>
<o:Company>Law Office of David P. von Ebers</o:Company>
<o:Lines>52</o:Lines>
<o:Paragraphs>12</o:Paragraphs>
<o:CharactersWithSpaces>7757</o:CharactersWithSpaces>
<o:Version>11.1539</o:Version>
</o:DocumentProperties>
<o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
<o:AllowPNG/>
</o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:DoNotShowRevisions/>
<w:DoNotPrintRevisions/>
<w:DisplayHorizontalDrawingGridEvery>0</w:DisplayHorizontalDrawingGridEvery>
<w:DisplayVerticalDrawingGridEvery>0</w:DisplayVerticalDrawingGridEvery>
<w:UseMarginsForDrawingGridOrigin/>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]-->
<!--StartFragment-->
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">Funny thing about <a href="http://constitution.findlaw.com/amendment1/amendment.html">the First
Amendment’s speech clause</a>: For something that’s relatively straightforward
– <i>“Congress shall make no law … abridging the freedom of speech”</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"> – it’s generated endless controversy and
misunderstanding.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">Earlier this week, U.S. District Judge
Beryl A. Howell struck down a federal statute (<a href="http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/uscode/40/II/C/61/IV/6135">40 U.S.C. § 6135</a>,
if you’re scoring at home), that provides:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in; mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; text-align: justify; text-autospace: none;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>It is unlawful
to parade, stand, or move in processions or assemblages in the Supreme Court
Building or grounds, or to display in the Building and grounds a flag, banner,
or device designed or adapted to bring into public notice a party,
organization, or movement.<b><o:p></o:p></b></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">Judge Howell’s ruling in the case
captioned <i><a href="file:///files_images/general/6-12-13_Hodge_Opinion.pdf">Harold
H. Hodge, Jr. v. Pamela Talkin, et al.</a></i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">, No. 12-00104 (U.S. Dist. Ct. D. DC June 11, 2013) (.pdf format),
found that “the absolute prohibition on expressive activity in the statute is
unreasonable, substantially overbroad, and irreconcilable with the First
Amendment,” and, therefore, “the statute [is] unconstitutional and void as
applied to the Supreme Court plaza.” Slip op. at 67.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">Nice, right? But hold on. Just when you
thought it was safe to protest in the Supreme Court Building or on its grounds,
<i><a href="http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/06/13/scotus-swiftly-revokes-right-to-protest-on-court-grounds/">Raw
Story<span style="font-style: normal;"> reports</span></a></i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<a name='more'></a><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in; mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; text-align: justify; text-autospace: none;">
<span style="color: blue; font-family: Georgia;"><i><a href="file:///files_images/general/6-12-13_Hodge_Opinion.pdf"><span style="text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;"><b>Howell’s ruling</b></span></a></i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>&nbsp;(PDF)&nbsp;meant, for the first time in
more than half a century, protesters would be allowed on the Supreme Court’s
plaza instead of being relegated to the sidewalk where they typically gather.<o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>Or it
would have, that is, if the Supreme Court didn’t nip it in the bud almost
immediately. <span style="color: blue;"><a href="http://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/supreme-court-bans-protests-on-its-grounds.php"><span style="text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;"><b>According to The Associated
Press</b></span></a></span>, a rule the court issued Thursday bans “picketing,
speech-making, marching or vigils” on the Supreme Court’s plaza, while
explicitly making way for “casual use” by visitors.</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">The Court’s new rule, known as <a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/publicinfo/buildingregulations.aspx">Regulation
Seven of the Court’s Building Regulations</a>, states:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .45in; margin-top: 0in; mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; text-align: justify; text-autospace: none;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>This regulation
is issued under the authority of 40 U.S.C. § 6102 to protect the Supreme Court
building and grounds, and persons and property thereon, and to maintain
suitable order and decorum within the Supreme Court building and grounds.&nbsp;
Any person who fails to comply with this regulation may be subject to a fine
and/or imprisonment pursuant to 40 U.S.C. § 6137.&nbsp; This regulation does
not apply on the perimeter sidewalks on the Supreme Court grounds.&nbsp; The
Supreme Court may also make exceptions to this regulation for activities
related to its official functions.<o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .45in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>No
person shall engage in a demonstration within the Supreme Court building and
grounds.&nbsp; The term “demonstration” includes demonstrations, picketing,
speechmaking, marching, holding vigils or religious services and all other like
forms of conduct that involve the communication or expression of views or
grievances, engaged in by one or more persons, the conduct of which is
reasonably likely to draw a crowd or onlookers.&nbsp; The term does not include
casual use by visitors or tourists that is not reasonably likely to attract a
crowd or onlookers.&nbsp;</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">So, that tells you what the Supreme
Court thinks of Judge Howell’s ruling, I suppose. Which is to say: They’re not
impressed.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">But it raises some important questions
about the extent to which speech is regulated in America. We like to think that
all expressive conduct, especially that which is directed to government
officials and institutions, is absolutely protected in all circumstances. A
common refrain during the Occupy protests was: <i>The First Amendment is our
permit!</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"> <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">Which is nice turn of a phrase, but,
for better or worse, it’s pretty meaningless from a legal point of view.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">For example, in <i><a href="http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=case&amp;court=us&amp;vol=468+&amp;page=288">Clark
v. Community for Creative Non-Violence</a></i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">, 468 U.S. 288 (1984), the Supreme Court upheld the National Park
Service’s decision to grant permits for the creation of a mock tent-city in the
“National Monument-core parks” in Washington (Lafayette Park and the Mall), but
to deny protesters the right actually to camp overnight in the tent-city.
Writing for the Court, Justice Byron “Whizzer” White (the only <a href="http://voices.yahoo.com/supreme-court-justice-byron-white-supreme-athlete-2425415.html">Heisman
Trophy candidate</a> ever to sit on the Court, as I like to point out),
explained:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><i>We
need not differ with the view of the Court of Appeals that overnight sleeping
in connection with the demonstration is expressive conduct protected to some
extent by the First Amendment. We assume for present purposes, but do not
decide, that such is the case, … but this assumption only begins the inquiry.
Expression, whether oral or written or symbolized by conduct, is subject to
reasonable time, place, or manner restrictions. We have often noted that
restrictions of this kind are valid provided that they are justified without
reference to the content of the regulated speech, that they are narrowly
tailored to serve a significant governmental interest, and that they leave open
ample alternative channels for communication of the information.<o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;"><a href="http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=case&amp;court=us&amp;vol=468+&amp;page=288">468
U.S. at 293</a> (citations and footnote omitted).<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">The Court upheld the Park Service’s
permitting decision, because the underlying regulation which prohibited
overnight camping in the “National Monument-core parks” was “narrowly focuse[d]
on the Government’s substantial interest in maintaining the parks in the heart
of our Capital in an attractive and intact condition, readily available to the
millions of people who wish to see and enjoy them by their presence.” <i><a href="http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=case&amp;court=us&amp;vol=468+&amp;page=288">Id.<span style="font-style: normal;"> at 296</span></a></i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">So, despite Judge Howell’s ruling in
the <i>Hodge</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;"> case, the same
rationale seems to apply to the Supreme Court’s rule prohibiting “demonstrations,
picketing, speechmaking, marching, holding vigils or religious services and all
other like forms of conduct that involve the communication or expression of
views or grievances” on its grounds. The rule is content-neutral (meaning the
court isn’t permitting some speech and prohibiting others); and, like the Park
Service’s rule in <i><a href="http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=case&amp;court=us&amp;vol=468+&amp;page=288">Clark</a></i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">, is “narrowly tailored to serve a significant
government interest” – <i>i.e.</i></span><span style="font-family: Georgia;">, <a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/publicinfo/buildingregulations.aspx">as the
rule states</a>, “to maintain suitable order and decorum within the Supreme
Court building and grounds.”<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">More to the point, however well
reasoned Judge Howell’s opinion may be, it’s the Supreme Court that gets to
decide the constitutionality of rules prohibiting or limiting protests on the
Supreme Court’s grounds. If I had to take a wild guess, I’d say they’re
probably not going to find their own rule to be unconstitutional. The fox
guarding the hen house and all that (albeit with some legal precedent in this
case). <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 12.0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia;">Just remember, kids, they’re not final
because they’re right, they’re right because they’re final.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<!--EndFragment-->Davehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08981424431669076836noreply@blogger.com0